Chennai Court September 1990 Judgments
P.V. Bakthavatchalam Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1871
Bellie, J.1. This Writ Petition is by one P. V. Bakthavatchalam, as Advocate who claims that he is very much interested in protecting the Civil and Democratic rights of citizens of India and particularly the State of Tamil Nadu, and as such, as a Public Interest Litigation, he is filing this petition to redress the sufferings of two prisoners who are kept in illegal custody in Palayamkottai Central Prison. 2. One Mr. David and one Mr. Raju were prisoners bearing Convict Nos. 5504 and 5510 respectively confined in Central Prison, Palyamkottai. Both were imprisoned to undergo imprisonment for life under Sections 396, 460 and 302, I.P.C. on 25-3-1975. They had suffered imprisonment for 15 1/2 years calculated from the date of their arrest on 1-4-1974. On 14-4-1989 the Government of Tamil Nadu ordered release of life convicts who had by then completed 14 years of imprisonment in pursuance of G.O. Telex No. 2875/ Pr. IV/89-6 dated 14-4-1989 and after their executing a bond they were duly re...
Tag this Judgment!N. Srinivasamoorthy Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1990
Reported in: [1991]81STC52(Mad)
Venkatasami, J. 1. This tax (revision) case is filed against as order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Main Bench), Madras, in T.A. No. 668 of 1979 dated October 1, 1980. 2. Brief facts relating to the case are the following : The petitioner is not a registered dealer either under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, or under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. For the assessment year 1973-74, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Adayar Division, by order dated April 18, 1978, determined the total and taxable turnover of the petitioner in a sum of Rs. 1,76,000 taxable at 3 1/2 per cent. In addition to the tax, the assessing authority also levied penalty in a sum of Rs. 9,240 under section 12(3) of the Act for not disclosing the turnover to the department till it was detected. The turnover, according to the assessing officer, represents the sale consideration received by the petitioner towards supply and fixing of auditorium chairs. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Letchumi Kunchamma and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ472
J. Kanakaraj, J.1. On the evening of 24.8.1980, the deceased Kesavan Nair was driving his motor cycle MDI 1472 from west to east along the Trivandrum-Nagercoil National Highway. When he was near Padanthalumudu, the taxi belonging to the appellant in AAO. No. 671 of 1985 was coming in the opposite direction from east to west and dashed against the motor cycle. The deceased sustained fatal injuries and died. The taxi car TNK 1271 was insured with the appellant in AAO. No. 559 of 1984. One Ramakrishnan was the driver of the said vehicle. The parents, sisters, widow and the minor son of the deceased filed a claim petition M.C.O.P. No. 38 of 1982 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nagercoil, claiming a total sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation. The claim petition was filed against the owner of the taxi car (appellant in AAO. No. 671 of 1985), the driver Ramakrishnan and the insurance company (appellant in AAO. No. 559 of 1984).2. In answer to the above claim petition, the...
Tag this Judgment!Makkiammal Ghori 'Uthamapalayam through Its Muthavalli' Janab Athavu a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1990
Reported in: (1991)464MLJ1
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the District Munsif, Uthamapalayam in I.A. No. 496 of 1988, which was an application under Order 22, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure for impleading the legal representatives of the deceased first defendant in the suit. The relevant facts are shortly as follows: The suit was filed by the petitioner herein for a declaration that the suit property was a wakf belonging to the plaintiff Ghori and for consequential decree directing defendants 1, 4, 5 and 6 to hand over vacant possession of the suit property after removing the superstructures without any let or hindrance and directing the fifth defendant to remove the gate put up by him in the 'B' Schedule property and directing the 6th defendant to remove the structure put up in the 'C Schedule property.2. On 15.6.1987, the first defendant -died. The plaintiff made an endorsement on 10.11.1987 that he was not filing L.R. petition for the first defendant. It i...
Tag this Judgment!The Divisional Manager, the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Letchumi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC290
Kanakaraj, J.1. On the evening of 24-8-1980, the deceased Kesavan Nair was driving his motor cycle MDI 1472 from west to east along the Trivandrum Nagcrcoil National Highway. When he was near Padanthalumudu, the taxi belonging to the appellant in A.A.O. No. 671 of 1985 was coming in the opposite direction from east to west and dashed against the motor cycle. The deceased sustained fatal injuries and died. The taxi car TNK 1271 was insured with the appellant in A.A.O. No. 559 of 1984. One Ramakrishnan was the driver of the said vehicle. The parents, sisters, widow and the minor son of the deceased, filed a claim petition M.C.O.P. No. 38 of 1982 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagercoil, claiming a total sum of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation. The claim petition was filed against the owner of the taxi car (appellant in A.A.O. No. 671 of 1985), the driver Ramakrishnan and the Insurance Company (appellant in A.A.O. No. 559 of 1984).2. In answer to the above claim petition, th...
Tag this Judgment!Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, Customs, Tiruchirapalli Vs. Paul M ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-1990
Reported in: 1992CriLJ3150
ORDER1. Paul M. A. Anthony, a Srilanka National, the respondent herein on 5-6-1990 at about 7-45 a.m. presented his baggage for Customs export examination at the Trichy airport for boarding Air Lanka Flight UL 132 bound for Colombo. Since his behaviour was not normal, the Counter Officer had reason to believe that he had concealed some contraband in his baggage. On being interrogated whether he had any contraband in his person or baggage, he replied in the negative. Thereupon, the Counter Officer examined his baggage in the presence of two independent witnesses and among other things, it was found to contain three eversilver lamps (Kuthuvilakku). As the lamps appeared to weigh more than what they should normally be, the Officer examined them in detail and found brown colour powder kept concealed in the three lamps, each weighing 75 gms, 75 gms and 71 gms, and a stinking smell emanated from the powder. When questioned, he is stated to have admitted that they were narcotic substances and...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Collector of Central Excise Vs. Paul M.A. Anthony
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-1990
Reported in: 1991(34)ECC152; 1991LC527(Madras); 1991(53)ELT161(Mad)
ORDER1. This petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. P. Rajamanickam, Central Government Public Prosecutor on behalf of the petitioner and of Mr. K. J. Ayyappan, Advocate for the respondent the Court made the following order : Paul M. A. Anthony, a Srilanka National, the respondent herein on 5-6-1990 at about 7.45 a.m. presented his baggage for Customs export examination at the Trichy air port for boarding Air Lanka Flight UL 132 bound for Colombo. Since his behaviour was not normal, the Counter Officer had reason to believe that he had concealed some contraband in his baggage. On being interrogated whether he had any contraband in his person or baggage, he replied in the negative. Thereupon, the Counter Officer examined his baggage in the presence of two independent witnesses and among other things, it was found to contain three eversilver lamps (Kuthuvilakku). As the lamps appeared to weigh more than what they should normally be...
Tag this Judgment!Rishab Spinning Mills Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-1990
Reported in: 1991(52)ELT364(Mad)
ORDERThis Writ Petition coming on for orders as to admission on this day upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Advocate for the petitioner, and of Mr. K. Jayachandran, Additional Central Government Standing Counsel on behalf of the Respondents, the court made the following order :- The petitioner has filed the above writ petition for the issuance of a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to issue a detention certificate to the petitioner in respect of synthetic mutilated rags imported by the petitioner, vide Bill of Entry No. 000002, dated 14-5-1990 and now detained on Inland Containing Depot, Coimbatore. 2. The petitioner had obtained additional licence No. 3310965, dated 16-11-1989 from a recognised export house Messrs. R. N. Oswal (Export), Knitwear, Ludhiana, Pursuance to the licence, the petitioner placed an order for import of 22 tonnes of synthetic mutilated rags which were shipped from ...
Tag this Judgment!Falcon Howard Heat Pumps Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Appellate Collector of Cust ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-1990
Reported in: 1995(51)ECC119
ORDER1. This writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Appellate Collector of Customs dated 7.10.1982 confirming the levy of Customs Duty under Heading 84.11(3) of the Customs Tariff Act and under item 29-A of the Central Excise Tariff. In and by the impugned order, the appellate authority has confirmed the classification made by the original authority that the compressor involved in this case is found to be used only in refrigerating system and not as a compressor used in a heat exchange device. If the compressor is classified as being used in the heat exchange device, the contention is, it will come under the general category and lesser duty is payable. I am of the opinion that it will not be possible for this Court to go into this petition and the proper thing is to permit the petitioner to file an appeal. It is contended that no appeal was filed because Rules had not been framed at the time of the impugned order. It is not now disputed that th...
Tag this Judgment!Subbaroyan and anr. Vs. Devadas Nadar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-1990
Reported in: (1990)2MLJ548
Srinivasan, J.1. The Second Appeal arises out of a suit filed by the respondent herein for recovery of possession against the appellants. The Civil Revision Petition arises out of an application under the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act filed by the appellants herein. The trial Court granted a decree for eviction in favour of the respondent and it was affirmed by the appellate Court. The petition filed by the appellants under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu City Tenants' Protection Act was dismissed by the trial court and that was affirmed by the appellate Court.2. The short facts relevant are these: The respondent purchased the suit property from one T.Srinivasan alias Chellappa under a document dated 17.4.1974 for Rs.4,000. He issued a notice dated 14.5.1974 terminating the tenancy of the appellants with the expiry of the month ending on 16.6.1974. The tenancy month is admittedly from 17.4.74 to 16.5.1974. Consequently, notice was issued terminating the tenancy with 16.6.1974...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »