Chennai Court October 1991 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.
R. Manonmani Vs. Kallamurthi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-22-1991
Reported in: 2(1993)ACC218
V. Ratnam, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the Claimant against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub-Court), TiruvannamaLal, in M.C.O.P. No. 49 of 1984.2. On 22.8.1984 at about 9.30 a.m. an accident took place between a bus TNM 6579 belonging to the 2nd respondent, driven by the 1st respondent and insured with the 3rd respondent and a cyclist, Ravi, who was proceeding from Vellore Road, near Periyar Statue at Tiruvannama Lal. In that accident, the cyclist Ravi sustained injuries in his waist, chest and stomach and the d instantaneously. The appellant is the mother of deceased Ravi and, according to her, the accident, resulting in the death of Ravi, took place entirely owing to the rash and negligent driving of the bus TNM 6579 by its driver. The deceased, according to the appellant, was working under a private doctor and was earning a salary of Rs. 150 p.m. besides doing beedies work at home, there by earning another Rs. 150/- p.m. and was supporting the appella...
Nesamony Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. Kochammal (Minor) Rep. by Fath ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-22-1991
Reported in: I(1995)ACC601
Ratnam, J.1. These appeals have been preferred against the common award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Padmanabhapuram, in M.A.C.P. Nos. 4, 5 and 16 of 1985. On 14.6.1984, at about 5.30 p.m. near Chunkkankadai near Kalliancadu Road, an accident took place involving the bus TMN 2690 belonging to Nesamony Transport Corporation plying on route No. 8 and a tourist bus bearing registration No. DEP 6111. Kochammal and Prema Sudha who are sisters, were returning from school to their house at Aloor in the bus TMN 2690 when the accident took place and both of them sustained several injuries. According to them, the bus TMN 2690 belonging to Nesamony Transport Corporation was proceeding from east towards west, while the bus DEP 6111 was driven from west towards east and the drivers of both the vehicles drove their buses rashly and negligently and that had caused the accident resulting in their sustaining injuries. In respect of the injuries so sustained by them in that accide...
Anbiah and ors. Vs. Rev. J. George Robinson and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Mad265; (1992)IIMLJ38
1. This second appeal is preferred by the defendants who have suffered a decree in respect of the ad ministration of the suit church at the hands of the first appellate Court even though the suit against them was dismissed by the trial Court. The subject matter of the suit is a Church in Andarkulam, in Kanyakumari District and its properties.2. The case of the plaintiffs is that the first plaintiff is a Pastor of the church and plaintiffs 2 to 7 are the elected deacons forming the Church Committee presided over the first plaintiff as its Chairman. The Church and its properties are under the immediate control of the said committee and under the Supervision of the Kanyakumari Diocese of the Church of South India. Originally 456 churches in South Travancore including the plaint church were under the L.M.S. Corporation in London, but after the churches merged with the Church of South India (C. S. I.) in 1947 all the properties of the Churches including that of the plaint Church were transf...
Assistant Registrar of Companies Vs. H.C. Kothari and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1991
Reported in: [1992]75CompCas688(Mad)
Padmini Jesudurai, J.1. This appeal against the acquittal is filed by the Assistant Registrar of Companies, Madras 6, challenging the acquittal, of the respondents, tried by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate - Economic Offences-II, Egmore, Madras, in C.C. No. 126 of 1985, for an offence under section 372(2) and (4) read with section 374 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2. The appellant filed the complaint against the respondents for the above offence on the allegation that they were the directors of Investment Trust of India Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') at the relevant time and an inspection by the Deputy Director (Inspection) attached to the office of the Regional Director, Company Law Board, Madras, made under section 209A of the Companies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') revealed that, during the financial years 1980, 1981 and 1982, the investments made by the company in the shares of other bodies corporate, was in excess of the 30 per cent. lim...
G. Vaidehi Vs. S. Govindarajan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1991
Reported in: (1992)2MLJ393
Mishra, J.1. The appellant, herein was the caveator/defendant in a proceeding under Sections 232and 276 of the Indian Succession Act for the grant of Letters of Administration regarding the estate of late K. Venkatachary as per his last will dated 9.3.1974. The testator died on 11.7.1976. The defendant/appellant filed a caveat on 24.11.1982. The application filed for Letters of Administration was converted as T.O.S. No. 9 of 1982. The plaintiff (executor of the will) claimed that he was the grandson of the testator through his only deceased son. According to him, the testator executed his last will in a sound disposing state of mind, he (plaintiff) being the sole legatee under the will directing him to arrange for the marriage of his two sisters and to maintain his widow. The two attestors of the will however were dead. The plaintiff claimed that he had arranged for the marriages of his two sisters as directed in the will and that the two loans remained payable on the house property.2....
Dravidar Kazhakam, Represented by the General Secretary, K. Veeramani ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-10-1991
Reported in: (1992)1MLJ530
ORDERRaju, J.1. The above writ petition has been filed for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent to forbear from printing and despatching the Greeting cards containing his religious faith to coincide with him by utilising the funds of the respondent Corporation. 2. The petitioner by name Dravidar Kazhagam, represented by its General Secretary, claims that it has been in existence, since 1925, that it was in the front of fighting against superstitions and social justice and strives to make the Indian Republic a true secular Republic as enshrined in the preamble to the Constitution of India. It also claims, to have fought always zealously any move by the State or any of its agencies from deviating from he path of secularism said to be the bedrock and basic fabric of the Constitution of India. The country is said to consist of people having faith in many religions are religious practices as well as rationalistic concept of human life and scientific pursuit of knowledge of nature. W...
Dr. Alexander Educational Foundation Vs. University of Pondicherry, Re ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-09-1991
Reported in: (1992)2MLJ97
ORDERAbdul Hadi, J.1. These two writ petitions are by Dr. Alexander Educational Foundation, Tambaram, against the Pondicherry University and the Government of Pondicherry.2. The abovesaid foundation runs an educational institution by name 'Pant Institute of Technology' from the year 1987. The 1st respondent-university granted to the said institution provisional affiliation to start B. Pharm. course, B.Sc. Nutrition course and B.Sc. (M.L.T.) course in 1987. On 9.4.1991, the 1st respondent-university sent two impugned show cause notices under Statute 32(5) of the Pondicherry University Act, 1985, one in respect of B. Pharm course and the other in respect of the two B.Sc. courses. With reference to B. Pharm course, the notice stated that the petitioner was given an opportunity to defend itself as to why the said B. Pharm course should not be de-affiliated from the academic year 1991-92 onwards. With reference to the other two B.Sc. course also, the notice stated that the petitioner was gi...
Asia Tobacco Company Limited Vs. Union of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1991
Reported in: 1994LC292(Madras); 1992(58)ELT418(Mad)
ORDER1. W.P. No. 997 of 1983 is filed for issue if Writ of Certiorari calling for the records comprised in the letter of the fourth respondent dated 23-8-1982 and to quash the same while W.P. No. 1153 of 1983 is for a Writ of manda mus directing the respondents 2 and 4 to exempt the outer shells and inner slides from the whole of duty of excise under Notification No. 66/82 C.E., dated 28-2-1982 in so far as the petitioner company is concerned. W.P. No. 1154 of 1985 is also for the issue of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records comprised in the letter of the second respondent dated 7-4-1982 and to quash the same. 2. The case of the petitioner as disclosed in the affidavit and which are necessary for the disposal of these writ petitions is briefly as follows :- The petitioner-company was incorporated in the year 1973 and is a Joint Sector limited company with 50% shareholding by Tamil Nadu Industrial Development Corporation Limited, a wholly owned State Government undertaking and th...
P. Jeyapal Vs. the Governor of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1991
Reported in: (1992)2MLJ34
ORDERA.S. Anand, C.J.1. The termination of services of the appellant serving at the relevant time as a Judicial First class Magistrate, by the Governor, on the recommendation of the High Court was called in question by the appellant through W.P.No.528 of 1990. The Writ Petition was dismissed by a learned single Judge on 16.2.1991, giving rise to the filing of this appeal.2. The High Court had made a recommendation to the Governor to terminate the services of the appellant when during a departmental enquiry ordered by the High Court and conducted by the Principal District Judge, Madurai, under directions of the High Court, it was found that the charges against the appellant inter alia of demanding, receiving and accepting bribe from certain persons, while discharging his functions as a Judicial Magistrate had been established. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report which was considered by the High Court and after following the formalities required by law, was accepted by the High Cour...
Indian Bank Vs. V.S. Perumal Raja and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-07-1991
Reported in: [1993]76CompCas787(Mad)
Abdul Hadi, J. 1. This original side appeal is against the order dated January 19, 1990 , in Company Application No. 569 of 1987 in C. P. No. 58 of 1985 on the file of this court. The applicant therein is the appellant herein. In the said application under section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the applicant sought for leave from this court for it to continue its suit against the fourth respondent-company and the latter's guarantor, on the file of Sub-Court, Tanjore. We are told that the said suit has since been numbered as O. S. No. 57 of 1987. It was filed on April 20, 1986, and it is for recovery of a sum of Rs. 5,84,895.23. A winding up order has been passed against the said respondent-company by this,court on August 20, 1986, in the abovesaid C. P. No. 58 of 1985 after the institution of the above suit. Therefore, the abovesaid application has been filed. 2. The learned trial judge has granted leave subject to the following terms : (a) The a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »