The Additional Commissioner Of Income ... vs P.L. Karuppan Chettiar on 1 February, 1978
1.(1979) Madras 1 in the case of [ The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras Vs. Mr.P.L.Karuppan Chettiar],
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.32 seconds)Commissioner Of Income Tax vs P.L. Karuppan Chettiar on 11 May, 1992
2.(1998) 2 Law Weekly 259 in [ The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mr.P.L.Karuppan Chettiar],
D.S. Lakshmaiah & Anr vs L. Balasubramanyam & Anr on 27 August, 2003
4. (2003) 10 S.C.C. 310 in the case of [Mr.D.S.Lakshmaiah and another Vs. Mr.L.Balasubramanyam and another],
P.R. Kannaiyan (Died) vs Ramasamy Mandiri on 28 July, 2005
5. (2005) 3 Law Weekly 627 in the case of [ Mr.P.R.Kannaiyan (died) and 7 others Vs. Ramasamy Mandiri S/o Govinda Mandiri and 10 others]
N.Ramachandran vs E.Varadarajan on 4 June, 2007
7.(2007) 4 M.L.J. 993 in the case of [Mr.N.Ramachandran Vs. E.Varadarajan and another]
Mallesappa Bandeppa Desai And Others vs Desai Mallappa And Others on 9 February, 1961
In the judgment reported in ( 2005) 3 Law Weekly 627 ( cited supra) the Hon'ble Division Bench, after discussing the two judgments reported in (2003) 10 S.C.C. ( cited supra) 310 and A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 1268, in [ Mallesappa Bandeppa Desai and another Vs. Desai Mallappa @ Mallesappa and another] has held as follows:-
Sankaranarayanan And Anr. vs The Official Receiver, Tirunelveli And ... on 30 January, 1976
From the decisions of the Supreme Court in A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 1268 (cited supra)A.I.R. 1977 Madras 171 in [Mr.Sankaranarayanan and another Vs. The Official Receiver, Tirunelveli and others] and also from the observations made by the Allahabad High Court in A.I.R. 1950 Allahabad 54 in [ Bhagwant Kishore and another Vs. Bishambhar Nath and others] and in Maynes Treatise on Hindu Law and usage, and all other decisions noticed above, it is apparent that no exception is carved out in the matter relating to acquisition in the name of Kartha, where it is proved that Kartha had no independent income and he is in possession of some nucleus and not necessarily sufficient nucleus of the joint family property.
Bhagwant Kishore And Anr. vs Bishambhar Nath And Ors. on 4 August, 1949
From the decisions of the Supreme Court in A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 1268 (cited supra)A.I.R. 1977 Madras 171 in [Mr.Sankaranarayanan and another Vs. The Official Receiver, Tirunelveli and others] and also from the observations made by the Allahabad High Court in A.I.R. 1950 Allahabad 54 in [ Bhagwant Kishore and another Vs. Bishambhar Nath and others] and in Maynes Treatise on Hindu Law and usage, and all other decisions noticed above, it is apparent that no exception is carved out in the matter relating to acquisition in the name of Kartha, where it is proved that Kartha had no independent income and he is in possession of some nucleus and not necessarily sufficient nucleus of the joint family property.
Section 100 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Ramaswamy And Another vs R. Murugan on 14 November, 2000
3. (2001) I C.T.C. 132 in the case of [ Mr.Ramaswamy and another Vs. Mr.R.Murugan],
1