Chennai Court April 1990 Judgments
J.C. Ambat Vs. the Chairman, Export Inspection Council of India and Se ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-06-1990
Reported in: (1990)1MLJ411
ORDERAnand. C. J. 1. The only question involved in this writ appeal is whether in a disciplinary proceedings where the employer is represented by an Inspector from the Central Bureau of Investigation to present its case the employee is entitled to legal assistance of a lawyer? The question arises in the following circumstances:2. The appellant, at the relevant time, was serving as Joint Director, Export Inspection Agency, Madras. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him on various charges detailed in the article of charges vide order dated 12th June, 1984. The appellant filed Writ petition No. 1 1678 of 1984 challenging the enquiry and sought quashing of the charges. An interim stay was granted at the time of the admission of the writ petition and the departmental enquiry was stayed. Subsequently it appears that the interim stay order was modified and it was directed that while the enquiry could go on, the final order should not be passed. It further appears that after the e...
Tag this Judgment!Canara Bank Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: [1991]70CompCas295(Mad)
Janarthanam, J.1. Ratna Packaging Complex (P.) Ltd. is a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act, 1956'), having its registered office at Rural Industrial Estate, Kattukuppam, Pondicherry. It carried on business in the manufacture of pacing materialls like corrugated boxes, rolls-boards and heavy duty shipping containers, etc. The Canara Bank offered certain finanical facilities as a secured creditor to the said company, which availed of the same on execution of necessary documents. Similarly, the Pondicherry INdustrial Promotion Devlopment and Investment Corporation Ltd. advanced certain amounts to the company and they also stood as guarantors to the bank for repayment of the amount by the company. The company on its inability to pay its debts was wound up on a petition by a crditor in Company Petition No. 56 of 1984 by an order of this court dated November 25, 1985, and the property of the company came to be vested with the official liquid...
Tag this Judgment!B.H.E.L. Ancillary Association Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1991(32)ECC316; 1990(49)ELT33(Mad)
Nainar Sundaram, J.1. These writ appeals have been directed against the common order of the learned single Judge in W.P. Nos. 11871 and 11872 of 1989. The writ petitions were filed by the appellants, putting forth the following prayer:'For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to permit the petitioner's members to avail of the benefit of the Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986 and to clear their goods without payment of duty under the said Notification and render justice.'The respondents in the writ petitions are the respondents in these writ appeals. For the sake of convenience, we are referring to the parties as per their nomenclature in the writ petitions. We shall presently advert to the relevant portions of the Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986, which shall hereinafter be referred to as the...
Tag this Judgment!Bhel Ancillary Association, Represented by Its President, Mr. Balamura ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: (1990)2MLJ16
Nainar Sundaram, J.1. These writ appeals have been directed against the common order of the learned single judge in W.P. Nos. 11871 and 11872 of 1989. The writ petitions were filed by the appellants, putting forth the following prayer: 'For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to permit the petitioner's members to avail of the benefit of the Notification No. 175/86 C.E., dated 1-3-1986 and to dear their goods without payment of duty under the said Notification and render justice.The respondents in the writ petitions are the respondents in these writ appeals. For the sake of convenience, we are referring to the parties as per their nomenclature in the writ petitions. We shall presently advert to the relevant portions of the Notification No. 175/86 - C.E., dated 1-3-1986, which shall hereinafter be referred to as th...
Tag this Judgment!M. HussaIn and Etc. Vs. Bharathiyar University, Coimbatore and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Mad45; (1991)IMLJ163
ORDER1. The prayer in the Writ Petition No. 9555 is as follows:--'.....to issue a writ, order or direction and more specifically a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to forbear from preventing the continuance of the petitioner's studies in M.B.B.S. with the second respondent and also to direct the 1st respondent to grant recognition of the petitioner's admission for the I Year M.B.B.S. with the second respondent during the academic year 1987-88.The prayer in W. P. No. 15402 of 1989 runs as follows :'.....to issue a writ of declaration or other appropriate writ or directions, declaring that the petitioner is entitled to continue and complete the 5 1/2 Years' M.B.B.S. Degree Course for which he has been admitted in 1986. . .. .'The prayer in W. P. No. 15407 of 1989 is to the following effect :'. . . . .to issue a writ of mandamus to the respondents directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue and complete the M.B.B.S. (Degree Course) of the Bharathiyar Universit...
Tag this Judgment!R. Narayanaswami and ors. Vs. Sri Siddha Raja Manicha Prabhu Temple
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1990
Reported in: (1991)67MLJ1
K.M. Natarajan, J.1. This letters patent appeal is filed by the unsuccessful defendants 5 to 7 against the judgment and decree passed by this Court in A.S. No. 730 of 1977, confirming the judgment and decree passed by the City Civil Court, Madras, in O.S. No. 547 of 1965.2. The facts which arc necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be briefly stated as follow:- For the sake of convenience the array of parties in the trial court is adopted in this appeal. The plaintiff Sri Siddha Raj Manicka Prabhu, Huminabad Mysore State, filed the suit under Section 70 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act to set aside the order passed by the fourth defendant, Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Madras. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit temple, Sri Kamala Kameswari, Triplicane, Madras, was founded by late Raja Eswardos Dayavanth Bahadur and it was private property. On his death, his son and guardian became the owners of the temple and they were adjud...
Tag this Judgment!Yesodaiammal (Died) and ors. Vs. Mahalakshmi Ammal and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1990
Reported in: (1990)2MLJ347
K.M. Natarajan, J.1. This appeal is filed by the 2nd defendant in the suit challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore in S.No. 179 of 1979.2. The facts which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be briefly stated as follows: The 1st respondent in this appeal, who is the plaintiff in the suit, has filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.15,653.75 on the basis of a mortgage deed dated 3-2-1965 executed by one Sankarappa Thevar and his son the 1st defendant herein, for a sum of Rs. 17,000 agreeing to pay interest at 12 per cent per annum. Subsequently, Sankarappa Thevar died and his son the 1st defendant alone is his legal representative. Since the 1st defendant has paid only a portion of the amount, the suit has been filed for the balance.3. The suit is resisted by the 1st defendant on the ground that he is entitled to the benefit of Section 2 of Act 40 of 1979. The 1st defendant has also pleaded some oral discharge. ...
Tag this Judgment!Grahadurai and Others Vs. Subash Chandra Bose
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-02-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ588
ORDER1. The accused, against whom the respondent has preferred a complaint for offences u/Ss. 406, 420 and 477A I.P.C. pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Sivakasi as SC No. 3 of 1990 invoke the inherent powers of this Court u/S. 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the above proceedings. 2. The allegations made in the complaint are briefly as follows : Petitioners 1, 2 and the respondent are brothers and the 3rd petitioner is the sons of the second petitioner. They and one Ramamurthy and one A. B. Athiban are partners of the National Fire Works Factory by virtue of a partnershipdeed dated 24-3-1983, the principal place of business being No. 74/1, Police Station Road, Sivakasi. The above National Fire Works Factory consists of several units numbering 32 as mentioned in the complaint. The first petitioner being the eldest of the partners had been managing the day-to-day administration of the fire and was carrying on all the business transactions for and on behalf of the partners. Under a special ag...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›