Chennai Court October 1989 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.
A. Easwara Moorthy and anr. Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu, Represen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-19-1989
Reported in: (1990)1MLJ202
ORDERSathiadev J.1. For comprehending the common points taken in these writ petitions, the averments in W.P. No. 8073 of 1989 are referred to hereunder.2. Petitioner is a lessee of stone quarry situated in S. No. 1645 of Vedamadurai village for fasli 1398. The lease expired on 30.6.1989. Under Rule 9 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), the lessees are eligible to apply for renewal for the next fasli. As per Rule 9 (2), every application for renewal shall be made to the Collector 60 days prior to the date of expiry of the earlier lease. Petitioner understands that first respondent had passed G.O. Ms. No. 964, Industries (K1), dt. 19.8.88, wherein Rule 9 (1) of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules had been amended to the effect that every application for renewal shall be made to the Collector three months prior to the date of expiry of the lease. The lessees in the District have been under the impression that the period...
Park View Enterprises Vs. State Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-18-1989
Reported in: [1991]189ITR192(Mad)
1. In all these writ petitions, the main point relates to the validity of Section 2(4) of Tamil Nadu Act 38 of 1987 by which the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and the Registration Act. 1908 had been amended. The writ petitioners have sought for declaration that the amendments are ultra vires, unconstitutional and void. The circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration, Madras dated 9-12-1988 is also assailed as illegal and invalid.2. The averments in the affidavit filed in the first of the writ petitions are referred to here under :Petitioner is engaged in the business of constructing flats in the city of Madras. It sells undivided share of lands to prospective builders-purchasers under registered sale deeds. Thereafter, purchasers build their flats at their own expenses. Hitherto stamp duty was collected only on the value of the undivided share in the land. Consequent to amended provisions, stamp duty is demanded on the cost of proposed const ruction of a flat, which is unconstitu...
Park View Enterprises Vs. State Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-18-1989
Reported in: [1991]71CompCas723(Mad)
1. In all these writ petitions, the main point relates to the validity of section 2(4) of the Tamil Nadu Act 38 of 1987 by which the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, and the Registration Act, 1908, had been amended. The writ petitioners have sought for a declaration that the amendments are ultra vires, unconstitutional and void. The circular issued by the Inspector-General of Registration, Madras, dated December 9, 1988, is also assailed as illegal and invalid. 2. The averments in the affidavit filed in the first of the writ petitions are referred to hereunder 3. The petitioner is engaged in the business of constructing flats in the city of Madras. It sells undivided share of land to prospective builders/purchasers under registered sale deeds. Thereafter, the purchasers build their flats at their own expense. Hitherto, stamp duty was collected only on the value of the undivided share in the land. Consequent to the amendment of the provisions, stamp duty is demanded on the cost of proposed const...
Seethalakshmi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-17-1989
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1037
ORDER1. This case discloses a lamentable state of affairs. A tale of woe has unfolded itself revealing how the principal characters who are high ranking police officials in charge of the District of Coimbatore in the matter of enforcement of law discharge their sacred duty in a cavalier fashion with a deep sense of irresponsibility and an obdurate disinclination to see the obvious ever ready to take shelter under the slogan 'it is a Civil dispute'. The denouement is reached within the precincts of this Court on the pulpit of Art. 226 of the constitution of India when the officers filed their counter affidavits which do not suffer from any vice other than 'suggestion falsi suppressio veri'. 2. Here are the facts which bear out the remarks made above. The writ petitioner sent a written complaint to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Coimbatore the third respondent herein, on 27-3-1989. The gist of the complaint is as follows :- 'Grave injustice has been done to the petitioner and he...
Narayana Nadar Vs. Jayakodi Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-17-1989
Reported in: I(1990)DMC596
Ratnam, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition, at the instance of the husband, is directed against the order of the Court below in I.A. No. 176 of 1986 in H.M.O.P. No. 30/1985, Sub-Court, Tenkasi, striking out the defence of the petitioner, for non-compliance with an order dated 23-9-1986 passed in I.A. No. 19 of 1986 for payment of interim alimony and litigation expenses to the respondent. On 1-7-1985, the respondent herein filed H.M.O.P. No. 30 of 1985, Sub-Court, Tenkasi, praying for the relief of restitution of conjugal rights. Stating that she had no independent income for her support and maintenance and also to meet the expenses of the proceedings, she filed I.A. No. 19 of 1986 praying that the petitioner should be directed to pay interim alimony of Rs. 300/- p.m. and Rs. 500/- towards litigation expenses. That application was resisted by the petitioner on certain grounds, which need not be noticed in extenso at this stage. Suffice it to say that on 23-9-1986, the Sub-Court, Tenkasi,...
Rangasamy Vs. Periammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-17-1989
Reported in: 1991ACJ45
V. Ratnam, J.1. This appeal, under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, has been preferred by the owner of the vehicle against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub-court), Cuddalore, for Rs. 17,000/- passed against the appellant, in C.P. No. 365 of 1979 filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 4 against the appellant and the fifth respondent herein praying for payment of compensation in a sum of Rs. 35,000/- in respect of the death of Kaliyan, the husband of the first respondent and father of respondent Nos. 2 to 4.2. According to the case of respondent Nos. 1 to 4, on 21.5.1979 at about 8.30 a.m. when Kaliyan was proceeding on his cycle towards east in the Salem-Kallakurichi Main Road, the lorry bearing registration No. MYM 6583 belonging to the appellant and insured with the fifth respondent was driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver Veerasamy and dashed against Kaliyan, resulting in his death on the spot. Claiming that deceased Kaliyan at the time of his death...
N. Lakshmanan Chettiar and ors. Vs. P.L. Ekappa Chettiar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-17-1989
Reported in: (1990)1MLJ113
ORDERRatnam, J.1. These Civil Revision Petitions, at the instance of defendants 1 to 4 in C.S. No. 55 of 1987, Sub Court, Sivaganga, have been preferred against the order passed by the Sub Court, Sivaganga, dismissing I.A.Nos.125 and 126 of 1988 praying for the reliefs of revoking the order passed in I.A. No. 358 of 1987 and for the dismissal of the suit in O.S. No. 55 of 1987 in limine.2. On 11.9.1987, the respondents herein filed before the Sub Court, Sivaganga, I.A. No. 358 of 1987 praying for leave to file a suit under Section 92, C.P.C. and also presented oh the same day a plaint in which they prayed for the settling of a scheme for the administration of Pillayarpatti Sri Karpaka Nagartharal trust and for an account of the management of petitioners 1 and 2 herein from 1986 onwards and to make them liable for their acts of mal-feasance, mis-feasance, nonfeasance and negligence. 'A' schedule to the plaint so presented detailed immovable properties while in the 'B' schedule the movab...
His Holiness Sri-ia-sri Kawivasi Muthukumaraswami Thambiran Swamigal, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-17-1989
Reported in: (1990)1MLJ252
ORDERRatnam, J.1. These civil revision petitions have been preferred by the Head of Sri Kasi Mutt (Hereinafter referred to as 'the Mutt') against the order passed by the District Court West Thanjavur, In I.A. Nos. 272 and 262 of 1985 in A.S. No. 137 of 1985 and I.A. No. 15 of 1988 and 68 of 1986 in A.S. No. 62 of 1986 filed by the Madurai Kamaraj University Teachers' Association, represented by its President (hereinafter referred to as the Association', for short) and the Government of Tamil Nadu represented by Commissioner and Secretary, Education Department, Madras-9. respectively.2. Briefly, stated, the circumstances giving rise to these civil revision petitions are as follows:The Mutt claimed that it had established as a religious denomination and has been maintaining, managing and administering Sri-la-Sri Kasivasi Swaminatha Samigal Senthamil Kalloori (College) at Tirupanandal and Sri Kumaraguru-paraswamigal Arts College at Arulnandhi Nagar, Srivaikundam and that the educational i...
Mary Thomas Vs. Dr. K.E. Thomas
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Mad100; I(1991)DMC47
1. Civil Suit Diary No. 20871 of 1988 was filed by the appellant (wife) against the respondent, her husband, on the Original Side of this Court, praying for a judgment and decree for a permanent injunction against the respondent (defendant) from interfering with her possession and enjoyment of certain property, for a declaration that the power of attorney executed by her to the respondent is unenforceable, for accounts for the amounts specified in Schedule 'A' to the plaint and for return of all the documents specified in the plaint Schedule 'C', the documents being title deeds, etc. By orders dated 24-11-1988, Abdul Hadi, J. held that the suit is not maintainable in entirety and the plaint was directed to be returned for presentation before the Family Court.2. The learned Judge held that the expression, 'District Court' in S. 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (Act of 1984), hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', includes the High Court, particularly because of S. 2(e) of the Act. He fur...
N.A. Ansary and ors. Vs. Jackiriya and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-1989
Reported in: 1991CriLJ476
ORDER1. This revision is directed against the order dated 28-10-1985 passed in MCP No. 3 of 1985 by the learned Taluk Executive Magistrate and Tahsildar, Chidambaram. 2. The subject matter of dispute is a mosque bearing Door Nos. 1 and 2, Labbai Street, Chidambaram Town. The said mosque owns certain properties. There had been a scramble for possession of the mosque between the petitioners ('B' Party) and the respondents ('A' Party), who were arrayed as counter-petitioners before the Executive Magistrate. The Inspector of Police, Chidambaram town, laid information before the learned Magistrate for initiation of proceedings under section 145 Cr.P.C. on 28-2-1985, since the scramble for possession of the mosque between the parties was likely to create breach of peace and law and order problem in the locality. The Magistrate, on receipt of the report, deriving the subjective satisfaction that the dispute between the parties was likely to cause breach of peace, passed a preliminary order on...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »