Chennai Court February 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.
Navilkal Tea Factory Vs. Cegat
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1993
Reported in: 1995(79)ELT415(Mad)
ORDER1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent passed in No. E/COD/520/88-D/Appeal No. E. 1086/88-D, dated 27-1-1989 and to quash the same and for consequential direction to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner on merits. 2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are the following : On 11-5-1986 officers of Central Excise, Coonoor Division have inspected the petitioner's factory and found certain irregularities, as a result of which, a notice was issued to show cause why a quantity of 12432 Kgs. of unaccounted tea should not be confiscated and why a differential duty of Rs. 2,48,238.58 p. should not be demanded and penalty should not be imposed upon the petitioner. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice, but the second respondent was not prepared to accept the reply sent by the petitioner and conseq...
Raja D.V. Appa Rao Bahadur and ors. Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu b ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1993
Reported in: (1993)1MLJ455
ORDERD. Raju, J.1. The petitioners in the above, writ petitions have filed petitions, W.M.P. Nos. 2213 to 2216 of 1993 for stay of all further proceedings for the levy and assessment of property tax under the provisions of Schedule IV of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, hereinafter referred to as the Act, as amended by the Rules in Schedule IV of the Act, hereinafter referred to as the Rules, in G.O.Ms. No. 1178, Municipal Administration and Water Supply, dated 10.12.1987 on and from 1.4.1993 relating to the respective petitioner's property mentioned therein. Having regard to the nature of the issues raised and by consent of parties the main writ petitions themselves were heard at Considerable length. Since the issues are also identical and common, they are disposed of together by this judgment.2. Though different writ petitioners in respect of different items of property have filed the above writ petitions, the respective contentions are identical and similar and it wo...
Periambillai and ors. Vs. Somayan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1993
Reported in: (1993)2MLJ275
Abdul Hadi, J.1. Plaintiffs are the appellants in this second appeal. They lost in both the courts below. The suit is for declaration of plaintiffs' title and consequential injunction in respect of the suit property or in the alternative for possession thereof. Though in the plaint schedule, initially the suit property is stated to be comprised in S. No. 124/2, Rettakulam Village, measuring 2.42 acres, later in the said schedule, it is mentioned as follows:P.S. Present enquiry on the part of the plaintiffs reveal that the suit property is included in S. No. 124/2 as well as 124/3 as a result of some recent measurements.2. Regarding the relationship between the parties, there is no dispute. One Veeran had two sons, Kathan and Semban. Kathan's son is the 1st plaintiff and Kathan's daughter is 3rd plaintiff, 2nd plaintiff is the son of the 1st plaintiff. Semban's son is Thannah. Thannah's wife is Kalli (D.W.2), Thannah's sons are Sivankali and Kathan (junior). Among these, all but Kalli, ...
Chandrasegar Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-1993
Reported in: 2(1993)ACC586
Arumugham, J.1. This Revision filed Under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. by the accused was directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence rendered by the learned Principal Sessions Judge at Pondicherry in Crl. Appeal No. 23 of 1988 whereby confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Trial Judge, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pondicherry, in S.T.R. No. 121 of 1987, in which the trial was conducted against the revision petition herein for the charges framed under Section 304(A) I.P.C. and thereupon convicted and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for aperiod of 2 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of which to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 1 month on finding the accused guilty of the charges tried against him. The brief facts of the prosecution case as culled out from the recorded evidence before both Courts below are as follows:2. The Revision Petitioner was a driver of a transport passenger bus owned by a private person by name...
Narayana Pillai and Others Vs. the District Collector, Nagercoil and A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: AIR1993Mad281
ORDER1. There is no pale of controversy that the respective petitioners in all these writ petitions had been granted licence for a period of one year relatable to 1984-85. For contravention of the provisions of Tamil Nadu Essential Trade Articles (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1984 (for short '1984 Order'), licence of the respective petitioners in all these writ petitions under Clause 19(2) of 1984 Order had been suspended for a period not exceeding 90 days and within three days ofsuch suspension, the grounds for such suspension had been communicated to each of them. For effecting the interim suspension not exceeding the period of 90 days, no opportunity need be given before ever such an order is passed and what is required under sub clause (2) of clause 19 of 1984 order is that the grounds of suspension have to be communicated within a period of three days from the date of suspension. Only for taking action under sub-clause (1) of clause 19 of 1984 order, an opportunity has to be given ...
Nalli Alias Nallianna Gounder Vs. the State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1409
K.M. Natarajan, J. 1. The first accused in S.C. No. 96 of 1984 on the file of the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Salem, has preferred this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of his conviction under section 302, Indian Penal Code and the sentence to undergo imprisonment for life and also the conviction under section 324, Indian Penal Code and the sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The appellant and his wife were tried for four charges on the allegation that they along with juvenile accused Gunasekaran and Vijaya on 15-8-1983 at about 3 p.m. attacked the deceased Chinnusami and party, in which the juvenile accused Gunasekaran caught hold of the deceased while the appellant (first accused) stabbed him with knife and when the wife of the deceased namely Kaliammal (P.W. 1) intervened, the second accused Palaniammal prevented her from doing so by obstructing her while the juvenile accused Vija...
Sri Mahalingaswami Devasthanam, and anr. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: (1993)1MLJ527
ORDERJanarthanam, J.1. Sri Mahalingaswami Devasthanam, Thiruvidaimaruthur and Sri Manokianathaswami Devasthanam, Thiruneelakudi, it is said are registered holders of the lands in villages going by the names Manjamalli, Thiruneelakkudi and Thiru-vidaimaruthur in Thanjavur District. The Tamil Nadu Levy of Ryotwari Assessment on Free-hold Lands Act, 1972 (Tamil Nadu Act XXXI of 1973-for short 'the Act') came into force with effect from 16.10.1979. The Assistant Settlement Officer, Thanjavur, pursuant to the salient provisions adumbrated in the said Act, issued notices Nos. 66, 75 and 79, dated 18.6.1984 to the aforesaid Devasthanams, relatable to their holdings of the registered lands respectively in the villages of Manjamalli, Thiruvidaimaruthur, Thiruneelakkudi, as respects determination of the question of issuance of a rough patta and rates of assessment imposable on such holdings at a ryotwari settlement. The Devasthanams resorted to the present action under Article 226 of the Constit...
N. Pitchai Vs. Oyyammal (Deceased) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: (1993)2MLJ236
Abdul Hadi, J.1. Both these second appeals arise out of the same suit O.S. No. 281 of 1980 and the appeal therefrom in A.S. No. 164 of 1981, on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, of Melur and Subordinate Judge of Madurai, respectively.2. The plaintiff is the appellant in S.A. No. 969 of 1982, and the sole respondent therein is the first defendant. Defendants 2 to 4 are the appellants in S.A. No. 1459 of 1982 and the first respondent therein is the plaintiff and the second respondent therein is the first defendant.3. The plaintiff is the son through the first wife of one Nadukattan. The first defendant is the second wife of the said Nadukkattan, and the defendants 2 to 4 are the sons of Nadukkattan through the first defendant.4. The first defendant died pending the second appeals and defendants 2 to 4 got themselves recorded as her legal representatives in S.A No. 1459 of 1982. In S.A. No. 969 of 1982, pursuant to the civil miscellaneous petitions filed by the appellant, defe...
M.D. Repatriate Co-operative Finance and Development Bank Ltd. Vs. Dep ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ438Mad; (1993)IMLJ553
Somsundaram, J. 1. This writ appeal has been filed against the order allowing W.P. No. 5192 of 1982 filed by the second respondent herein praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the 1st respondent dated June 30, 1981 in T.S.E. Case No. 43 of 1976. 2. The second respondent was working as a Junior Assistant /Cashier/Recovery Assistant in the Repatriate Co-operative Finance and Development Bank, the appellant, hereinafter referred to as the appellant bank. According to the second respondent he was sick in the month of August, 1973 and he applied for 15 days leave from August 14, 1973 to August 30, 1973 by submitting a letter dated August 16, 1973 to the appellant bank. Thereafter he sent a medical certificate dated August 22, 1973. However, the appellant bank treated the period from August 14, 1973 as absence without leave, suspended him from service and thereafter issued a charge memo dated May 22, 1974 containing the following three charges : 1. He was carele...
A.B.T. Parcel Service Vs. City Palayakat Company and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: 1993ACJ1269
E.J. Bellie, J.1. Against a decree passed for a sum of Rs. 16,100/- as damages, the defendant A.B.T. Parcel Service has filed this appeal.2. The plaintiff, City Palayakat Company, is dealing in lungis and kailies. Its office is in Madras. It used to get kailies from mofussil for transporting to other countries like Malaysia. The manufacturers of lungis in the mofussil used to send lungis to the plaintiff through the defendant parcel service. On receipt of waybills from the manufacturers in the mofussil, the plaintiff would send its staff with an endorsement on the waybills authorising with its seal thereon for receipt of lungis from the defendant's godown.3. It appeals three manufacturers in the mofussil have sent through the defendant lungis in gunny bags totalling seven in number to the total value of Rs. 16,100/- on 7.9.1974 and 8.9.1974 to be delivered to the plaintiff at Madras. They have sent the waybills to the plaintiff through post. The plaintiff was not aware of the despatch ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »