Chennai Court October 1987 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.
Managing Director Thanthai Periyar Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. Amma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: 2(1988)ACC619
Swamikkannu, J.1. The first respondent, the Managing Director, Thanthai Periyar Transport Corporation Ltd., has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge), Vellore, made in M.A.C.T.O P. No. 339 of 1979 dated 27-4-1981.2. Two petitions, namely M.A.C.T.O.P. Nos. 361 and 339 of 1979 bad been filed by the husband and the mother respectively of the deceased bad been filed before the Tribunal under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. Husband, in his petition claimed compensation of Rs. 30,200/- while the mother of the deceased in her petition claimed compensation of Rs. 10,000/- on the ground that she had suffered mental agony and pain on account of the loss of her youngest daughter. Both the petitions were tried jointly and a common award is passed by the Tribunal.3. In this appeal we are concerned only with the award passed in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 339 of 1979 filed by the mother of the deceased Santha.4. The c...
Kanniammal and anr. Vs. Prabhakar and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: 2(1988)ACC518
Swamikkannu, J.1. This Appeal coming on for bearing on Thursday the 24th day of September 1987 and Thursday the 22nd day of October, 1987 upon perusing the petition of Appeal, the order of the Lower Court, and the material papers in the case, and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. G. Desappan, Advocate for the Appellants and of Mr. P.N. Prakash, Advocate for the 1st respondent and of Mr. V.R. Gopalan, Advocate for the 2nd respondent, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court made the following order.2. This is an appeal preferred by the petitioners Kanniammal and Subbulu Reddy against the award dated 22-9-1981 in M.O.P. No. 371 of 1980 on the file of the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Addl. Sub Judge II), Chengalpattu.3. The case of the appellants before the Tribunal in short is as follows : The deceased Ramesh was the son of the appellants. The deceased was travelling in the lorry APC 8569 on 13-7-1980, accompanying the goods transported. Near Pallipet...
Asstt. Collector of Customs Vs. Shanmugham
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1987
Reported in: 1988(15)ECC1; 1988(37)ELT201(Mad)
Padmlni Jesudurai, J.1. Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to cancel the bail granted to the 1st respondent in Cri. M.P. No. 3107/87, dated 9-9-1987 on the file of the Court of the Principal Sessions Judge, Madras and commit the respondent to custody.Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and the counter affidavit filed therewith and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. P. Rajamanickam, Central Government Prosecutor on behalf of the petitioner and of Mr. G. Padmanabhan, Advocate for the 1st Respondent, the Court made the following order :-'The Assistant Collector of Customs, Madras who is investigating into a case registered against the first respondent found to be in possession of 33 gold bars, valued at Rs. 11,59,116/- while arriving as a passenger from Singapore by flight No. MH 030 on 13-8-1987 at Madras Airport, kept conc...
The Assistant Collector of Customs Prosecution Cell Vs. Shanmugam and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1987
Reported in: 1988(14)LC108(Madras)
Padmini Jesudurai, J.1. This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and the counter affidavit filed therewith and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. P. Rajamanickam Central Government Prosecutor on behalf of the petitioner and of Mr. G. Padmanabhan, Advocate for the 1st Respondent, the Court made the following order:The Assistant Collector of Customs, Madras who is investigating into a case registered against the first respondent found to be in possession of 33 gold bars, valued at Rs. 11,59,116/- while arriving as a passenger from Singapore by flight No. MH 030 on 13.8.1987 at Madras Airport, kept concealed in the cloth belt tied around his waist has filed this present petition to set aside the order of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madras, granting bail to the first respondent.2. Facts Briefly are : On 13.8.1987 the first respondent allged at the Madras Airport from Singapore flight and on search it was found that in...
R. Subbarayan Vs. Ravaimani Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Mad228; (1988)IMLJ294
ORDER1. The contention raised on behalf of the revision petitioner is that the lower Court has not given adequate reasons for condoning the delay of 505 days in filing !he application to set aside the ex parte decree in the case. It is submitted further that in the counter filed by the plaintiff (revision petitioner herein) it is specifically stated that the respondent-defendant had eloped with someone and had driven away the revision petitioner from the premises at Durgah, G.S.T. Road, Chengalpattu. It is also pointed out that the lower Court, in paragraph 5 onwards of its order, has, dealt with properly. the contentions of the revision petitioner (plaintiff) and had excused the delay merely on the ground that the respondent-defendant is *a woman. This Court has gone through the order under revision. This Court was also ,taken through the contents of the contentions ,raised by the revision petitioner before the lower Court in the petition for condoning the delay.2. It is a well settle...
A. Duraiswamy Pillai Vs. A. Arumugham
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: (1988)1MLJ76
P. Sethuraman, J.1. Defendant is the appellant. This is an appeal against the order passed by the District Judge, Tiruchirappalli in A.S. No. 349/80. The said appeal was preferred by the plaintiff who had filed a petition under Order 20, Rule 12, C.P.C., before the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli, praying for the appointment of a Commissioner to make an enquiry with regard to the mesne profits in respect of the property concerned in the suit. The suit was for partition filed by the plaintiff. The learned Principal Subordinate Judge had dismissed the petition. Aggrieved with the said order of dismissal, the plaintiff filed the appeal before the District Judge, Tiruchirappalli and the learned Principal District Judge allowed the appeal and set aside the order dismissing the petition filed by the plaintiff, and directed the lower Court to dispose of the application at an early date. Aggrieved with the said order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruchirappalli,...
K. Ramaswamy Vs. Esther Johney
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: (1988)1MLJ257
ORDERK.M. Natarajan, J.1. The unsuccessful husband before both the Courts below has preferred this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the order of dismissal of the petition filed by him for a declaration that the marriage between him and the respondent was null and void and for divorce.2. The case of the appellant is that he is a Hindu, that the respondent is a Christian and that their marriage was solemnised under the Special Marriage Act, in the presence of the Marriage Registrar, Koilpatti, on 25.10.1972. The said marriage was not a voluntary one, but it was done under the compulsion and coercion exercised by the parents and relations of the respondent. It is also alleged that the respondent had not come to the age of 18 and hence their marriage is not valid. Lastly it was alleged that even before their marriage, the respondent was having illicit intimacy with one Sankaralingam alias Durai Pandian, that the above fact was concealed by the respondent and her parents, ...
N. Sellappa Gounder Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Labour and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC42
Sethuraman, J.1. Opposite Party is the appellant. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Salem.2. The second respondent herein filed a claim petition before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Salem, stating that he was employed by the opposite party from 2-7-1982, to deepen the well belonging to the opposite party and during and in the course of such employment, by the opposite party the workman, while engaged in such employment, for digging and deepening of the well on 5-7-1982, received personal injuries during the accident when dynamite was placed for deepening operation of the well. According to the claimant, himself and others were working in that well on 5-7-1982 and the opposite party was present supervising the work and at about 3-30 p.m. as directed by the opposite party he used dynamite and in the explosion which resulted he suffered injuries during the accident and he was taken to a private cli...
Lakshmi Ammal Vs. Lakshmanan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-1987
Reported in: (1988)2MLJ469
S.A. Kader, J.1. The appeal arises out of the judgment and decree of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Trichi in O.S. No. 98 of 1978. The first defendant is the appellant.2. This is a suit for declaration that the suit property belongs to the plaintiff and defendants 5 and 6, who are brothers and for recovery of possession and for meane profits past and future. The suit property, which is a house in Trichi Town, originally belonged to one Kuppuswami Chettiar, hereinafter referred to as the senior Kuppuswami Chettiar. By a deed of settlement dated 10-11-1987 the senior Kuppuswami Chettiar settled this property on his mother Akilandam Ammal and his wife Thayarammal alias Nacharammal for their lives without any power of alienation with the vested remainder on his heirs. The said senior Kuppuswami Chettiar died in 1930. His mother Akilandam Ammal died in or about March, 1943. Some months after her death, her daughter-in-law Thayarammal alias Nacharammal executed a deed of sale in respe...
Muthu Pillai Vs. Seruvakkal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1987
Reported in: (1988)2MLJ143
ORDERK.M. Natarajan, J.1. These two revisions are directed against the common order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Madurai, in C.M.A. Nos. 3 and 4 of 1986 dismissing the appeals filed by the revision-petitioner.2. The facts which give rise to these revisions are briefly as follows:-The respondent filed the suit in O.S. No. 122 of 1977 on the file of the District Munsif, Melur against this revision petitioner, who is the fifth defendant in the suit, and 15 others, for partition and separate possession of her 1/6th share in the suit properties. The revision petitioner was set ex parte. A preliminary decree was passed in the above suit on 18-8-1978 and a final decree was passed on 18-1-1984. According to the revision-petitioner, she came to know of the passing of the preliminary decree and the final decree only on 18-1-1985 when the Amin of the Court along with the village officials and the Surveyor came in a body in connection with the execution of these decrees. On her objecti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›