Chennai Court October 1993 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. Ramalingam and anr. Vs. the Superintending Engineer, Highways and R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-14-1993
Reported in: (1994)2MLJ366
ORDERAR. Lakshmanan, J.1. The prayer in the these writ petitions is to quash the order dated 3.3.1993 of the 5th respondent, under which the 5th respondent has authorised the 6th respondent to collect the toll fees from Amaravathi Bridge at K.M. 301/2 in N.H. 7 in Karur Bye-pass Road for the period from 10.3.1993 to 9.2.1994 and to direct respondents 1 to 5 to dispose of the right to collect the toll in respect of Amaravathi Bridge at K.M.301/2 in N.H.7 Karur Bye-pass road by public auction or by calling for public tenders.2. Before proceeding to consider the contentions advanced on behalf of the petitioners as well as the respondents, it is necessary to set out certain admitted facts which are available in the pleadings filed by both parties in both the writ petitions leading to the filing of the writ petitions. The Government of Tamil Nadu have constructed a bridge at K.M. 301/2 on N.H. 7 across the river Amaravathi near Karur town in the Karur Bye-pass Road, at a huge cost of Rs. 13...
Collector of Customs, Madras Vs. Madras Electro Castings P. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-13-1993
Reported in: 1994(45)ECC99; 1994(71)ELT646(Mad)
K.A. Swami, C.J.1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 27-9-1993 passed in Writ Petition 16738 of 1993. Learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition and issued the following directions to the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal : 'Taking the above into consideration, I direct the release of the subject goods pending the filing of the appeal before CEGAT on the following conditions :- (1) The petitioner should pay the differential duty in cash to the tune of Rs. 2 lakhs. (2) The petitioner should furnish a bank guarantee to the tune of Rs. 2 Lakhs. (3) The petitioner is permitted to give a personal bond, as provided in the Customs Act, for the balance of the differential duty, redemption fine and penalty. The writ petition is ordered on the above terms. There will be no order as to costs. This order is subject to the final order of the CEGAT.' 2. At the outset, it may also be pointed out that the learned single Judge has recorded a clear finding ...
The Collector of Customs Vs. Madras Electric Castings P. Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-13-1993
Reported in: (1994)1MLJ664
K.A. Swami, C.J.1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 27.09.1993 passed in W.P. No. 16738 of 1993. Learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition and issued the following direction to the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal:Taking the above into consideration, I direct the release of the subject goods pending the filing of the appeal before CEGAT on the following conditions:(1) The petitioner should pay the differential duty in cash to the tune of Rs. 2 lakhs.(2) The petitioner should furnish a book guarantee to the tune of Rs. 2 lakhs.(3) The petitioner is permitted to give a personal bond, as provided in the Customs Act, for the balance of the differential duty, redemption fine and penalty.The writ petition is ordered on the above terms.There will be no order as to costs. This order is subject to the final order of the CEGAT.2. At the outset, it may also be pointed out that the learned single Judge has recorded a clear finding in the following term...
A.Y. Prabhakar Vs. Naresh Kumar N. Shah
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1993
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas191(Mad)
Pratap Singh, J. 1. The accused in C.C. No. 6392 of 1991 on the file to the Fifth Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Madras, has filed this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing further proceedings in C.C. No. 6392 of 1991. 2. The short facts are : The respondent has filed a complaint against the petitioner under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (I shall hereinafter refer to it as 'the Act'), on the allegations that the petitioner had issued a cheque for Rs. 1,00,000 on April 10, 1991, drawn on Indian Bank, Egmore Branch, towards the sale consideration and when presented for payment it was dishonoured by the bank of the accused, on the ground 'insufficient funds'. The respondent issued legal notice on May 9, 1991, calling upon the accused/petitioner to pay the said sum of Rs. 1,00,000. The same was acknowledged by the accused but he did not pay the amount. Hence, the complaint. 3. Mr. S. J. Jagadev, learned counsel for the petiti...
Tmt. Kasthuri Radhakrishnan and 2 ors. Vs. A. Radhakrishan and 4 ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-12-1993
Reported in: 1996(1)CTC55
ORDERRathnam, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 549 of 1989, Subordinate Judge's Court, Erode, against the order passed by the court below holding that the court-fee paid on the plaint under Section 25(d) of the Tamil Nadu Court fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is incorrect and that court-fee should have been paid under Section 40 of the Act. The first petitioner is the mother of petitioners 2 and 3 and the first respondent is the father of petitioners 2 and 3 and the husband of the first petitioner. In the plain-filed by petitioners, it had been stated that the first respondent the serving at Erode in 1989 and the petitioners wanted to acquired house property at Periyar Nagar in Erode under a Scheme of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and inasmuch as the first respondent's father was then a government servant with greater chances of getting allotted a site, he made an application and he was allotted...
K. Kumar Vs. Bapsons Foot Wear
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1993
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas172(Mad)
Pratap Singh, J. 1. The accused in C.C. No. 1550 of 1990, on the file of the Seventh Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras, has filed this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, for quashing the proceedings in the said C.C. No. 1550 of 1990. 2. The respondent has filed the complaint against the petitioner under section 138, read with section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which I shall hereafter refer to as 'the Act'). The allegation in it are briefly as follows : In the course of their business, the accused/petitioner herein had issued a cheque dated December 20, 1989, for Rs. 2,000 drawn on Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Polur. When the cheque was presented for collection through their bankers State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Broadway Branch, Madras, the same was returned dishonoured on December 23, 1989, with an endorsement 'please refer to drawer'. Thereupon, the complainant sent notice through lawyer dated January 3, 1990. It was returned by the accused...
N. Purushothama Reddy Vs. the Revenue Divisional Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1993
Reported in: (1994)1MLJ95
ORDERBakthavatsalam, J.1. Writ Petition No. 597 of 1992 is filed by the petitioner against the order of the respondent therein to issue a community certificate to the petitioner's daughter to the effect that she belongs to Konda Reddy community.2. Writ Petition No. 598 of 1992 is an off-shot of the earlier order passed in the earlier writ petition (W.P. No. 597 of 1992) by which Director of Technical Education has passed an order in the month of December, 1991 directing the Principal of the second respondent college to remove the name of the petitioner's daughter from the rolls of the college.3. When the miscellaneous petitions came up for hearing, by consent of of both parties, the main writ petitions are taken up for final hearing, though no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents.4. The short facts are:The petitioner's daughter N.P. Sayee Sankari was selected under the category of Scheduled Tribe Category for B.E. (Civil) Engineering course for the academic year 1989-90 ...
M.S.P. Rajesh Vs. M.S.P. Raja and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-11-1993
Reported in: (1994)1MLJ216
Thangamani, J.1. The family of Rao Bahadur Senthilkumara Nadar of Virudhunagar is one of the richest in this part of the country. It owns extensive extents of plantations in Shervaroy Hills and Kerala besides other assets including a spinning Mill at Tuticorin. It is also having a very flourishing foreign trade of coffee. The family has also its business in Mangalore, Coimbatore, Bangalore and Virudhunagar. M.S.Periaswami Nadar is the eldest of the three sons of Senthi Kumara Nadar. There was a partition among Senthi Kumara Nadar and his sons under Ex. B-76 dated 9.4.1941. Appellant Rajesh and first respondent Raja are the sons of Periaswami Nadar. The father and two sons in turn divided their family properties under Ex. B-2, dated 6.9.1954. Periaswami Nadar died on 21.1.1955. Under Ex. A-2, dated 11.10.1956 appellant, first respondent and their mother Thangammal partitioned the properties left by Periaswami Nadar. Schedule 'A' of this partition deed relates to the properties allotted ...
M.V. Muthuramalingam Vs. D. Narayanaswamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1993
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas77(Mad)
Thangamani, J. 1. On November 4, 1991, and on November 15, 1991, the petitioner issued two cheques for Rs. 2,00,000 each drawn on the Federal Bank Limited, Anna Nagar, in favour of the complainant. The cheques were presented on December 11, 1991, and they were dishonoured. The respondent again presented the cheques on January 18, 1992, and they were dishonoured on January 20, 1992, on the ground that there were no sufficient funds in the account of the drawer. On February 5, 1992, the respondent telegraphically called upon the petitioner to pay the amount due on the cheques. The petitioner acknowledged the receipt of the telegram on the same day, but failed to pay the cheque amount. So, the respondent preferred a private complaint in C. C. No. 1737 of 1992 in the Court of the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Madras, which was taken on file under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The petitioner submits that he is the chairman of the Vellammal Educational Trust. T...
P. Mohamed Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-08-1993
Reported in: [1994]209ITR707(Mad)
Ratnam J.1. This revision case, at the instance of the assessee, under section 54(1) of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act), has been preferred against the order of the Tamil nadu Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Madras, in A.T. No. 84 of 1990 relating to the assessment year 1987-88. The assessee had entered into an agreement on July 5, 1984, with one Sastha in respect of 1,100 rubber trees that stood on an extent of ten acres, which belonged to Sastha. In order to appreciate the controversy arising for decision in this revision, it would be necessary to refer to the terms of the agreement. The agreement recited that as 1,100 rubber tress had become old and the yield of latex had reduced and the incurring of further expenditure would not yield results, but would result in wasteful expenditure, the owner of the land and the rubber trees decided that it would be advantageous to slaughter the trees and the assessee agreed to do ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »