Chennai Court November 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.
C. Arun Prasad Vs. the Headmaster, Municipal H.S. School and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-04-1993
Reported in: (1994)1MLJ386
ORDERBakthavatsalam, J.1. When the miscellaneous petition came up for hearing by consent of both parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.2. The writ petitioner is before this Court against an order of expulsion from the first respondent school from 6.8.1993 onwards. This resolution seems to have been passed by the teachers association. The petitioner hails from a poor coolie family and he belongs to Scheduled Caste. It seems that a strike had taken place on 4.8.1993 against the decision for raising the sum of Rs. 300 for uniforms. It seems the students abstained from classes and the Sub-Collector interfered with the matter and the police came to the scene and the students were injured. It is alleged in the affidavit that the petitioner was only a spectator of gathering. It seems the school authorities held three students responsible for the said incident and an order of expulsion was passed on 5.8.1993 against (1) Manivannan, (2) Agora Moorthy, and (3) Ra-...
Narayanaswamy and anr. Vs. the Special Tahsildar for Land Acqusition, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-03-1993
Reported in: (1994)1MLJ393
ORDERK.M. Natarajan, J.1. The above writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent to refer the matter to the civil court for determining the amount of compensation payable to the petitioner for the acquisition of their land in S. No. 408/2 to an extent of 17 1/2 cents in Angeripalayam, Chettipalayam Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District.2. Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this writ petition can be stated as follows:The petitioners are the joint owners of an extent of 17.50cents in S. No. 408/2, Angeripalayam, Chettipalayam Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District. Proceedings were taken under the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the respondents for the purpose of providing house sites to Adi Dravidars. According to the petitioner, though no notice under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Act was issued to him, the petitioner was informed that he should appear before the first resp...
Rajamanickam and Three ors. Vs. Elangovan and Four ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-02-1993
Reported in: 1996(1)CTC541
ORDERRatnam, J.1. The legal representatives of the deceased first plaintiff and the second plaintiff in O.S. No. 598 of 1986, Additional District Munsifs Court, Tindivanam, have preferred this civil revision petition against the order passed by the Court below, holding that the partition deed dated 12.11.1953 is admissible in evidence for collateral purposes. In order to appreciate the circumstances giving rise to this question, it is necessary to very briefly refer to the facts. According to the case of the petitioners, one Vaithyalinga Mudaliar (fifth defendant in the suit) was the owner of the A and B schedule properties in the suit. On 23.1.1984, a document of exchange was executed between Vaithylinga and another Palani (not a party to the suit) in and by which the A schedule properties were to be taken by Palani and the properties belonging to Palani were to be taken by the fifth defendant. Palani is stated to have sold on 17.12.1985 the properties obtained by him under the deed o...
Nandagopal Vs. N.E.P.C. Agro Foods Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1993
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas213(Mad)
Pratap Singh, J.1. The accused in C.C. No. 1439 of 1992, on the file of the VIIth Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras, has filed this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, praying to quash the proceedings in the said C.C. No. 1439 of 1992. 2. The respondent has filed the private complaint against the petitioner for an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 1881 (which I shall hereafter refer to as 'the Act'). The allegations in it are briefly as follows : The complainant is carrying on business as manufacturer of wheat products. The accused is carrying on business as general merchants and commission agents in wheat products In the course of the business transaction between them, accounts were verified and it was found that a sum of Rs. 1,20,466 was due and payable by the accused to the complainant and the accused issued a cheque dated September 8, 1992, for Rs. 1,20,466 to discharge the said sum due and payable by the accused to...
Dr. H. Ranganathan and anr. Vs. V. Chandrasekar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-01-1993
Reported in: (1994)1MLJ85
ORDERMishra, J.1. These petitions arise in O.S.A. Nos. 215 and 216 of 1993, which were preferred against the judgment and decree passed in C.S. No. 690 of 1985, wherein a learned single Judge of this Court has granted general as well as special damages to the plaintiff/respondent of Rs. 10,00,000 and Rs. 7,00,000 respectively with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of the decree and 6% per annum from the date of the decree till the realisation with costs payable by the appellants. We have ordered in C.M.P. Nos. 14392 and 14393, dated 15.10.1993, as follows:The appellants in O.S.A. Nos. 215 and 216 of 1993 have moved the above applications seeking stay of further proceedings pursuant to the decree passed in C.S. No. 690 of 1985. Ordinarily, the appellate court is reluctant in staying money decrees including the decree by way of compensation as general damages or special damages. The appellants herein, however, are a public limited company and th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›