Chennai Court July 1992 Judgments
Ebinezer Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: 1992CriLJ3543a
Arunachalam, J.1. Ebinezer alias Bhaskar, who was A-3 in SC No. 141 of 1985 on the file of Court of Session, Chengalpattu is the appellant. He was tried along with Varadan and Nagesh (A-1 and A-2) on a single charge, framed under S. 302 read with S. 34, Indian Penal Code, for having caused the death of deceased Damodaran, by the appellant attacking him with a knife on his left shoulder, right chest and back indiscriminately, A-1 attacking the victim with a knife on his head and A-2 cutting the deceased with a knife on his right shoulder at or about 6 a.m. on 2-9-1984, near the Block Development Office on the Tiruvottiyur High Road, at Minjur. 2. Learned Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty under S. 302 Indian Penal Code (simpliciter) and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. A-1 and A-2 were acquitted, to our mind, without sufficient cause. 3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows :- Deceased Damodaran and P.W. 5 Chandra are the son and daughter of Puttan, a reside...
Tag this Judgment!Care International Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: 1993(63)ELT201(Mad)
ORDER1. The first of the writ petitions is to quash an order of the Assistant Collector of Customs dated 14-7-1992 refixing the value of Dathatsu Diesel engines with gear box. Originally, the value was fixed at Rs. 7000/- per engine and Rs. 500/- per gear box. The successor Assistant Collector revised the value taking the view that the relevant materials had not been taken into account and the consignment had not been examined fully. He has passed an order on 14-7-1992. Admittedly, an appeal lies to the Collector (Appeals), against the said order. In the affidavit filed an support of the writ petition it is stated that the right of appeal is purely illusory and as the order of adjudication is vitiated by errors apparent on the fact of the record, it can be challenged in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. In the course of arguments, it was contended that the Assistant Collector had no jurisdiction to pass an order revising the value fixed by his predecessor an...
Tag this Judgment!T.N. Gomathinayagam Vs. D. Dayal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ658Mad
ORDERAbdul Hadi, J. 1. WA No. 506/91 is by the 3rd respondent in WP 3105/86 and against the order dt. March 21, 1991 in the said writ petition allowing the same. The said writ petition is by one D. Dayal, possessing Engineering Degree qualification and working in the Madras Corporation, the 2nd respondent in the said writ petition and 3rd respondent herein. The 1st respondent in the said writ petition, who is the 2nd respondent in this appeal, is the State of Tamilnadu. The writ petitioner is the 1st respondent in this appeal. The 3rd respondent-appellant is a Diploma Holder in the service of the said Corporation. 2. The question in the writ petition relates to the promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer (who was earlier called Assistant Engineer) other than Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in the said Corporation Engineering Service. As per Rule 4 of the relevant rules, viz., Madras Corporation Engineering Service Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') frame...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Airlines Canteen Workers Union Vs. Director Personnel, Indian A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ837Mad
ORDER1. The prayer in the main writ petition is as follows : 'To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ directing respondents 1 and 2 to regularise all the casual workers working in the canteen of respondents 1 and 2 at Madras and those who put in 240 days of work during their tenure as casual workers.' 2. While admitting the writ petition, an order of interim injunction was granted by this Court in W.M.P. No. 26150 of 1991 restraining respondents 1 and 2 from recruiting fresh workers as casuals for the canteen. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed W.M.P. Nos. 4215 and 4216 of 1992 for vacating the interim injunction granted in W.M.P. No. 26150 of 1991 on December 12, 1991. A common order was passed in W.M.P. Nos. 26150 and 26151 of 1991 and 4215 and 4216 of 1992 to the following effect : 'Let the petitioners continue in the employment subject to any disciplinary proceedings on the conduct, pending disposal of the above writ petition. If the em...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. the Madras Vanaspathi Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: 1993(44)ECC234
Kanta Kumari Bhatnagar, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the learned single Judge dated 4.2.1992. The petitioner-respondent herein was carrying on business of manufacturing Vanaspathi and Refined Oil. The point involved in this appeal is simple and that is, whether the credit earned by the respondents prior to 25.8.1989 when the Notification bearing No. 27/87 CE dated 1.3.1987 allowing Money Credit on the usage of minor oils in the manufacture of Vanaspathi falling under Sub-Head 1504 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act 5 of 1986 as amended by Notification No. 192/87 dated 12.8.1987 was in force can be declined by a subsequent Notification No. 39/89 CE (N.T.) dated 25.8.1989. The respondent was denied by the department the credit from 1.3.1987 to 25.8.1989. Being aggrieved by the act of the concerned authorities, the respondent filed the writ petition praying for the quashing of the Notification No. 39/89 dated 25.8.1989. The respondent has als...
Tag this Judgment!State, by Public Prosecutor and Another Vs. Selvaraj and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1992
Reported in: 1994CriLJ705
Maruthamuthu, J. 1. The appeal and the revision had been filed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil in Sessions Case No. 32 of 1984 dated 30-8-1985 in acquitting both the accused. 2. There were two accused against whom four charges were being framed, all relating to one and the same transaction that took place on 28-1-1984 at about 9-30 p.m. at Mylode, within the limits of Eranial police station. The first charge was against A-1 under section 302, IPC on the allegation that he committed the murder of Dasan by stabbing him with a kattari knife. The second charge was against A-2 under S. 302 read with S. 34, IPC on the allegation that he and A-1 had the common intention of committing the murder of Dasan and that in furtherance of the same, A-1 committed the murder of Dasan. The third charge was against A-1 under S. 307, IPC on the allegation that he attempted to commit the murder of Verghese by stabbing him with katari knife. The fourth...
Tag this Judgment!P. Devendran Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1992
Reported in: (1993)1MLJ133
ORDERK.S. Bakthavatsalam, J.1. The petitioner challenges the acquisition proceedings of certain lands in S. Nos. 85/2, 85/3 and 85/5 for an extent of 0.27 acres, 5.26 acres and 1.90 acres respectively in Thiruvanmiyur village.2. For the implementation of the Besant Nagar Phase II Scheme by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, the Government sought to acquire certain lands including the petitioner's lands by a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') which was published in the Gazette on 9.8.1978. The declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published in the Gazette on 8.8.1981. The petitioner challenged the declaration under Section 6 of the Act by way of Writ Petition No. 10128 of 1981 in respect of those lands, mentioned above, on the ground that he has got an approved layout in respect of S. No. 85/3 prior to the publication of notice under Section 4(1) of the Act and that he is entitled to get exclusion of layouts approved prior...
Tag this Judgment!Pachaiyappan and ors. Vs. Sri Kamatchi Amman Koil Devasthanam Represen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-15-1992
Reported in: (1993)1MLJ137
ORDERThanikkachalam, J.1. The legal representatives of the plaintiff are appellants herein. The plaintiff filed O.S. No. 254 of 1972 for declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to collect the rent and to perform Thai Poosam Festivals as per the terms of the will dated 1.1.1913 executed by one Sundarambal, wife of Palani Pathar. The case of the plaintiff is as under:The suit property originally belonged to one Palani Pathar, who died leaving behind him his wife Sundarambal as his sole Legal Representative. They did not have any issues. Sundarambal in turn executed a will dated 1.1.1913 in respect of the suit property stating that 1/4th of the rent accrued from the suit property shall be utilised for the payment of taxes and towards repairing charges. The remaining portion of 3/4th of the rent should be spent for Subramanya deity of Kamatchiamman temple during Poosam Festivals in the month of Thai. It was also stated therein that the Testator's brother-in-law Pavadai Pathar and Vaiyap...
Tag this Judgment!A.M. JaIn College by Honorary Secretary Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-14-1992
Reported in: (1993)1MLJ140
ORDERLakshmanan, J.1. The main writ petition has been filed by the petitioner college through its Honourary Secretary for the following relief : To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the records from the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms. No. 561, Education, dated 15.6.1992, conveyed to the petitioner in the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Rc. No. 25393/ Ha.8/92 dated 17.6.1992 and quash the same.2. The writ petition was admitted by this Court on 26.6.1992 and notice was ordered to the respondents on the same date in W.M.P. No. 11880 of 1992. The prayer in W.M.P. No. 11880 of 1992 is as follows : To stay the operation of the impugned G.O.Ms. No. 561, Education, dated 15.6.1992 in so far as it relates to B.Com. and B.A. (Corporate) courses for Jain students in the petitioner college pending disposal of the writ petition.3. The petitioner college is registered under the Societies Registration Act. It was founded in the year 1952 and prim...
Tag this Judgment!A. Stephen Vs. Govt. of Tamil Nadu and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-1992
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ794Mad
ORDER1. The writ petition itself is taken up for hearing with the consent of the parties. 2. The petitioner's services were terminated by third respondent. He raised a dispute and the matter went before the fourth respondent under the Industrial Dispute Act. The fourth respondent passed an award on March 19, 1992. It was found by the fourth respondent that the petitioner was guilty of the misconduct with which he was charged. But the Labour Court took the view that the punishment of dismissal from service was disproportionate and consequently the Labour Court considered the question of reinstatement in service. But it observed that reinstatement was not possible as the fair price shops were not conducted by the third respondent at that time. Therefore, the Labour Court directed the third respondent to give a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- to the petitioner herein. The award of the Labour Court is not challenged by the third respondent. But it is challenged only by the petitioner according...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »