Chennai Court April 1989 Judgments
Khoday Brewing and Distilling Industries Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Mad124
ORDERSathiadev, J.1. This appeal is preferred by petitioner in W. P. No. 13918 of 1988 which was filed to quash the communication dated 10-11-1988 of the second respondent-Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, Madras and direct it to finalise the offers already submitted on 16-9-1988 in regard to the purchase of IMFS products by the second respondent. Pending disposal of the writ petition, it filed W.M.P. No. 20835 of 1988 to injunct the second respondent from purchasing and accepting delivery of IMPSProducts from local manufacturers in the State of Tamil Nadu alone on the learned Judge by order dated 23-12-1988 dismissing the said petition along with smilarly filed W.M.Ps., this writ appeal is preferred.2. In the writ petition, which is also taken up for hearing along with the writ appeal, it is stated as follows :Petitioner is one of the five largest Companies in India producing' Indian Made Foreign Spirits (hereinafter referred to as IMPS). Till 1982 such products were fre...
Tag this Judgment!Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. Vs. Rangaswamy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Mad160
ORDERSivasubramaniam, J. 1. These writ petitions and the Letters Patent Appeals are coming before us on a reference made by one of us, namely, Venkataswami, J., in the batch of writ petitions Nos. 9138 of 1986 etc. filed by the Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., as the learned Judge felt that the judgment rendered by a Bench of this Court consisting of S.Natarajan, J., as he then was and Singaravelu, J., in Indian Rare Earths Limited v. Special Collector, Land Acquisition Officer, Padmanabhapuram Thukkalai, Kanyakumari District reported in 1986 WLR 146 requires reconsideration in view of the later decision of the Supreme Court in Santosh Kumar v. Central Warehousing Corporation reported in : [1986]1SCR603 . As the same point is involved in the other writ petitions and Letters Patent Appeals, they have also been heard along with the said writ petitions. 2. In the affidavit filed in W. P. No. 9138 of 1986 batch on behalf of the Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., the following contentions h...
Tag this Judgment!Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited, a Company Represented HereIn by I ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-1989
Reported in: (1989)2MLJ302
Sivasubramanyam, J.1. Thease writ petitions and the Letters Patent Appeals are coming before us on a reference made by one of us, namely, Venkataswami,J. in the batch of Writ Petitions Nos. 9138 of 1986 etc. filed by the Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., as the learned Judge felt that the judgment rendered by a Bench of this Court consisting of S.Natarajan,J. as he then was and Singaravelu, J., in Indian Rare Earths Limited Represented by its Secretary and Chief Personnel Manager v. The Special Collector, Land Acquisition Officer, Special, Padmanabhapuram, Thukkalai, Kanyakumari District and Ors.reported in 1986 W L.R.146 requires reconsideration in view of the later decision of the Supreme Court in Santhosh Kumar and Ors. v. Central Warehousing Corporation : [1986]1SCR603 . As the same point is involved in the other writ petitions and Letters Patent Appeals, they have also been heard along with the said writ petitions.2. In the affidavit filed in W.P. No. 9138 of 1986 batch on behalf ...
Tag this Judgment!Maduraj City Liquors Dealers Association Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and O ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Mad220
ORDERPetitioner Association has come to this Court praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus forbearing the first respondent herein from altering its policy with regard to licensing of Indian Trade Foreign Liquor (I.M.F.L.) retail shops in so far as the petitioner is concerned.2. W.M.P. No. 6338 of 1989 is filed to amend the prayer in the main W.P. No. 3485 of 1985, was ordered on 25-4-1989. The amended prayer is to the following effect:--'.....to issue any writ, order or direction more appropriate a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to consider the application for renewal of FL-1 Licences for the year 1989-90 submitted by the members of the Petitioner Association in terms of the conditions set out in the notice issued by the respondent authorities in Na. Ka. No. 83/83/ dt. 8-2-1989...'3. The Petitioner Association is registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 and has 130 members all of whom are retailers of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (I.M...
Tag this Judgment!Egmore Nungambakkam Taluk Wine Merchants Assoication, Represented by I ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-1989
Reported in: (1989)2MLJ23
ORDERRamalingam, J.1. Under the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Licence and Permit) Rules, 1981, the petitioner was granted a licence in Form No. FL.l for the retail sale of bottled Indian made foreign spirits. The period of the current licence was to expire on 31-3-1989. In pursuance of a notice issued to him, the petitioner paid a sum of Rs. 20,600 and applied for renewal of the licence for the year 1989-90.2. The Government of Tamil Nadu made the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Retail Vending) Rules, 1989, and published the same in G.O.Ms.No.596, Prohibition and Excise, dated 15-4-1989. Rule 33 of the 1989 Rules states that the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Licence and Permit) Rules, 1981 in so far as they relate to the retail vending of Indian-made foreign liquor shall be repealed.3. The effect is that on and after June 1989, the persons like the petitioners who had been granted a retail licence in Form FL1, under the 1981 Rules would become disentitled to continue to run their retail shops. Hence th...
Tag this Judgment!Spencer and Co. Ltd., Madras Vs. B. Vajravelu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1989
Reported in: (1990)ILLJ569Mad
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari, calling for the records connected with T.S.E. No. 25 of 1986 on the file of the second respondent, namely, Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Appeals), Appellate Authority under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, and to quash the order dated 1st June 1987. 2. The facts which give rise to the filing of the writ petition can be briefly stated as follows : The first respondent joined the services of the writ petitioner on 6th September 1950 as a clear and in 1986 he was working as Pay Officer. By an order dated 23rd May 1986 his services were terminated because the writ-petitioner-company had lost confidence in him. It is seen that the work of the first respondent includes disbursement of wages as per pay bills prepared by the computer to the workmen and also payment of over-time, gratuity and compensation to them as Pay Officer. One of the employees working under th...
Tag this Judgment!Workman Rep. by India Cements Employees Union, Sankari West Vs. Indust ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1989
Reported in: [1991(62)FLR365]; (1991)IILLJ141Mad
1. This petition is filed for directing the second respondent/manager to pay the petitioner/workman his last drawn wages of Rs. 475 under S. 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act from 24th July, 1985 onwards pending disposal of the writ petition. 2. The facts which are necessary for the disposal of this application can be briefly stated as follows : The petitioner was working as an earth loader in the limestone quarry maintained by the second respondent. By virtue of a settlement, dated 8th June, 1978 the second respondent agreed to take the workmen on the rolls of K.D.P. and Company and six other unlicensed contractors with effect from 1st April, 1978 on the same terms and conditions applicable to regular employees of India Cements Ltd., subject to their being medically fit. The petitioner was informed on 11th August, 1978 by the second respondent that their company's medical officer found that he was suffering from leprosy and by another letter dated 8th November, 1978 it was intimated...
Tag this Judgment!The High Court, Represented by Its Registrar Vs. R. Periaswamy and anr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-1989
Reported in: (1989)2MLJ191
Mohan, Officiating C.J.1. The Registrar, High Court, Madras, is the appellant in this case.2. The short facts leading to the writ appeal are as under:The first respondent is a Law Graduate. He was working as an Assistant in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. In the year 1979 he was selected to act temporarily as Judicial Second Class Magistrate, by an interview conducted by two of the Judges of this Court The Government of Tamil Nadu passed, G.O. Ms. No. 810. Home (Courts -I) Department, dated 25th March, 1986 to the following effect:Under Rule 13(1)(e) of the Tamil Nadu State Magisterial Service Rules, the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby terminates the temporary service of Thiru R.Periaswamy as Temporary Judicial Second Class Magistrate in the Judicial Department in the Tamil Nadu State Magisterial Service and direct that he be reverted to the parent department.2. The Registrar, High Court, Madras is requested to revert Thiru R. Periaswamy to his parent department viz, Tamil Nadu Electricity...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank Staff Union, State Bank of India Officers's Association etc ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-24-1989
Reported in: [1989(59)FLR431]; (1989)ILLJ554Mad
Venkataswami, J.1. In all the writ petitions though the prayers differ in form, the ultimate relief sought in substance and essence is the same. Hence, by consent, all the writ petitions are taken up together and the counsel on all sides advanced common arguments. In the circumstances, we dispose of all these writ petitions by this common order. 2. The Writ Appeal No. 683 of 1988 is preferred against an interim order in W.M.P. No. 341 of 1988 in W.P. No. 237 of 1988. In view of the final disposal of all the writ petitions including W.P. No. 237 of 1988, no separate order is necessary in W.A. No. 683 of 1988. 3. The common question raised in all these writ petitions is whether check-off facility can be extended by the respective Bank management to unrecognised unions. The petitioners in all these writ petitions contended that the check-off facility which had been hitherto extended only to recognised unions should not be extended to unrecognised unions, even though they are registered un...
Tag this Judgment!V. E. Periannan Vs. Wealth-tax Officer.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-24-1989
Reported in: [1989]30ITD182(Mad)
ORDERPer Smt. P. K. Ammini, Judicial Member - This appeal by the assessment see is against the order of the Commissioner [Appeals]-IX Madras, disallowing the claim for exemption under section 5[1] [xxxiii] of the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment year 1985-86.2. The status of the assessee in this case in Hindu undivided family [Specified] [Resident] represented by its karta by name Shri V. E. Periannan. The assessee filed a return of wealth on 30-3-1987 admitting a net wealth of Rs. 4,91,000. While completing the assessment for 1985-86 the Wealth-tax Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee for exemption of Rs. 12,01,916 being the investment made out of the remittance from Maur, Malaysia under section 5[1] [xxxiii] of the Act. On appeal the Commissioner [Appeals] confirmed the order of the Wealth-tax Officer. Hence this appeal before us.3. The only point that falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the assessee is entitled to get the exemption under section 5[1] [xxxiii] ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »