Chennai Court November 1984 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
V. Veerarajan and ors. Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu Reptd. by the ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-1984
Reported in: (1985)2MLJ223
ORDER: The Government have examined the conciliation report of the Labour Officer first cited In regard to an industrial dispute raised by Thiru A. Kondiah and 6 others against the Management of Lucas TVS Limited, Madras-50 over the issue relating to the non-employment and they pass the following orders:2. It is seen that the enquiries were conducted adhering to the principles of natural justice and that the punishment imposed is not disproportionate to the gravity of the offence committed.3. Hence the government consider that there is no case to refer the issue in dispute for adjudication.We find that the order had given reasons even with regard to the question whether the punishment imposed is disproportionate or not to the gravity of the offence committed. Thus, we find there is enough compliance of Section 12(5) of the Act. It is needless to state, as also pointed out by the learned Judge, whose order is appealed against, that there is no mandate in law that the government shall wr...
Ramakrishnan Vs. Samiyar Marappa Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-1984
Reported in: (1986)1MLJ53
ORDERV. Ratnam, J.1. The Civil Revision Petition arises out of proceedings initiated by the petitioner in I.A. No. 128 of 1980 in I.P. No. 29 of 1971, Sub Court, Coimbatore, under Section 68 of the Provincial Insolvency Act (V of 1920) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), praying that the sale of an one-fourth share in an extent of 12-99 acres in G.S. No. 271, Pongalur Village, Avanashi Taluk, belonging to the insolvent/second respondent by the third respondent herein in favour of the first respondent herein on 18.7.1980 should be set aside. Claiming that the petitioner is a creditor furnished by the insolvent and that the insolvent is indebted to him in a sum of Rs. 5,000/- on a promissory note executed on 10.2.1969, the petitioner complained that he had no notice of the sale held by the Official Receiver on 18.7.1980 and that the property which was worth more than Rs. 20,000/-had been sold for a very low price as the first respondent had successfully kept away the real bidders. St...
Thirumathi P.G. Lalitha Bai Vs. the Spl. Tribunal for Co-operative Cas ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-1984
Reported in: (1986)1MLJ243
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. The writ petition is to quash the orders of the first respondent made in C.M.A.No. 1 of 1983 dated 31st August, 1983.2. The facts leading to the writ petition are as under. The petitioner is a Member of the third respondent Society (the Cuddalore Co-operative House Building Society Ltd.,) Cuddalore. She was allotted No. 42 in Maraisusai Nagar on 12th October, 1966 pursuant to a decision taken by the committee of the Society as is seen from the orders of the Society dated 22nd January, 1966. The allotment was for a sum of Rs. 1,784. The petitioner was intimated of that allotment and thereafter on 21st December, 1966, the sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioner by the Society. That deed was registered on 22nd December, 1966. One of the conditions of the allotment was that the petitioner should put up a house because under bye-law 37(b) of the Society the petitioner should have applied for the Government loan through the Society within a period of 8 months f...
Sakthi Sugars Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-1984
Reported in: [1985]59STC52(Mad)
Chandurkar, C.J. 1. These several writ appeals and writ petitions raise a question with regard to the validity of section 24(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as well as the validity of the notices of demand issued under section 24(3) of the Act before it was amended by Act 22 of 1982 with effect from 1st November, 1982 and under rule 18(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). It is not necessary at this stage to refer to the facts in these several cases. Suffice it to mention that in almost all these petitions and appeals, the assessments were regulated by rule 18 of the Rules, and consequently monthly returns in respect of the turnover of the dealers concerned had to be filed accordingly to rule 18 and in cases where the sales tax deposited along with the monthly return had been found to be deficient, notices of demand have been issued demanding penalty under section 24(3) of the Ac...
Perunchithiranar Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1984
Reported in: AIR1986Mad83
ORDER1. While the nation is still mourning the death of the late Prime Minister Srimathi Indira Gandhi while the citizens of the country are still paying, reverential homage to the departed soul with tearful eyes and bleeding hearts, while the National Flag is still flown half-mast and while the country is observing State mourning, this writ petition has come to be filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the State oil Tamil Nadu, the Union of India and the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu to forbear from keeping the Urns containing, the ashes of the cremated body of late Srimathi Indira Gandhi for public dharshan or from taking the same to various places in India and from spending public revenue and using Government machinery for the said purposes.2. The petitioner, Thiru Perunchithiranar, has described himself in his affidavit as a rationalist and socialist working for the development of Tami...
Perunchithiranar Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Represented by Its Chief Secr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-12-1984
Reported in: (1985)2MLJ56
ORDERS. Natarajan, J.1. While the nation is still mourning the death of the late Prime Minister Srimathi Indira Gandhi, while the citizens of the country are still paying reverential homage to the departed soul with tearful eyes and bleeding hearts, while the National Flag is still flown half-mast and while the country is observing State mourning, this writ petition has come to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the State of Tamil Nadu, the Union of India and the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, toforbear from keeping the Urns containing the ashes of the cremated body of late Srimathi Indira Gandhi for public Dharsan or from taking the same to various places in India and from spending public revenue and using Government machinery for the said purposes.2. The petitioner, Thiru Perunchithiranar has described himself in his affidavit as a rationalist and socialist working for the deve...
Video Movies by Propr: Vs. D. Ramanujam, Madras and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-1984
Reported in: AIR1986Mad119
Ramanujam, J. 1. This is a petition for punishing the respondents herein for criminal contempt under S. 15(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.2. The petitioner herein who is running a video library along with 30 others filed writ petition No. 753 of 1984, questioning the validity of the TamilNadu Ordinance No. 2 of 1984, which was later replaced by TamilNadu Exhibition of Films on Television Screen through Video. Cassette Recorders (Regulations) Act 1984 (TamilNadu Act 7 of 1984). The said writ petition was admitted on 26-1-1984, by Sathiadev J. and interim orders were passed staying the operation of Ss. 17 and 18 of the Ordinance till 15-3-1984. Similar writ petitions had also been filed by several other video libraries and similar interim orders have been passed therein. The writ petitioners later sought extension of stay beyond 15-3-1984, and Ratnavel Pandian J. by an order dt. 15-3-1984, extended the said stay till 15-4-1984.3. In the meanwhile on 21-3-1984, a programmed was bro...
The Workmen of Best and Crompton Industries Ltd., Represented by the G ... Overruled
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-08-1984
Reported in: (1985)ILLJ492Mad
Shanmukham, J.This writ appeal is directed against the judgment of Mr. Justice Padmanabhan made in Writ Petition No. 4304 of 1981. The 1st respondent in this appeal came forward with the said writ petition to quash the award passed by the 2nd respondent in I.D. No. 97 of 1979 directing reinstatement of 75 workmen whose services were not requisitioned on and after 16th October, 1978 by the management (1st respondent therein) on the ground that these workers are not their workmen but were only contractor labour provided by the licenced contractor, the 4th respondent herein. The 2nd respondent (Presiding Officer, 2nd Additional Labour Court, Madras) rejected the stand taken by the management, but upheld the contention of the workmen that the 4th respondent herein was not a labour contractor for the management, that the 4th respondent was a mere name-lender and did not hold any requisite licence under The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the...
K.S. Kasimaris Ceramique (P.) Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: [1985]58CompCas809(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the decision of Mohan J. in W.P. No. 765 of 1982 dismissing the same. The third respondent herein had filed O.P. No. 114 of 1961 on the file of the court of the District Judge, Chingleput, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 86,56,223.92 being the amount due in respect of two mortgage loans taken by the appellant. The said original petition has been filed under s. 31 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, which is intended to facilitate the speedy recovery of outstanding loans to all financial institutions such as the third respondent. The appellant has filed its counter-statement in the said original Petition. One of the contentions urged by the appellant before the said District Court was that the original petition was not maintainable and that court had no jurisdiction to try the matter. The appellant also moved the District Court by filing an application under s. 113 read with O. 46, r. 1 of the CPC to refer the question of c...
P. Subramaniam and anr. Vs. Reserve Bank of India and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: [1985]57CompCas755(Mad)
Ramanujam, J.1. These writ appeals arise out of the common judgment dated February 9, 1983, rendered by Padmanabhan J. in W.P. Nos. 3180 and 3208 of 1979 (A. S. P. Aiyer v. Reserve Bank of India : AIR1983Mad330 dismissing the same. 2. The appellants herein had filed the above writ petitions praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents herein to for bearer from enforcing the Miscellaneous Non-Banking Companies (Reserve Bank) Directions, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Directions'), on the ground that the said Directions are not valid and enforceable. These writ petitions having been dismissed by Padmanabhan J., the appellants have filed these appeals reiterating the contentions which they urged before the learned judge. 3. The appellants are partners of the Palghat Credit Corporation, a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. They are also shareholders and directors of Palghat Chit Funds (P.) Ltd., a Company registered under the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »