Chennai Court March 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.
Harshad Doshi Vs. Duraiswamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-17-1993
Reported in: (1993)2MLJ112
ORDERBakthavatsalam, J.1. This civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against an order passed in E.P. No. 2822 of 1991 in MACTOP No. 310 of 1990 dated 6.8.1992 on the file of X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras.2. Certain facts are necessary to decide whether his revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution has to be entertained. The respondent was a victim of a road accident at Kathipara junction, St. Thomas Mount, Madras. The hit was by the petitioner's car and the accident took place on 2.5.1985 and it was a case of hit and run. The respondent seems to have suffered head injury and the cycle on which he rode. On 28.9.1988, a first information report was sent to the Inspector of Police, St.Thomas Mount about the accident by the respondent. On 27.2.1989, nearly after four years, the police registered a case in Crime No. 169 of 1989 against the petitioner herein on the directions of I.G. of Police, Madras after protracte...
Indian Bank Represented by Its Chairman and Managing Director Vs. K. U ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-16-1993
Reported in: (1993)2MLJ186
Srinivasan, J.1. The common question raised in these writ appeals is whether the first respondent in W. A. No. 733 of 1992 and the respondent in each of the other writ appeals, hereinafter referred to as 'the writ petitioners', are entitled to be appointed by the appellant-Indian Bank hereinafter referred to as the 'appellant-Bank', on compassionate grounds. The husband of the petitioner in W.P. No. 8668 of 1991 (W.A. No. 733 of 1992), father of the petitioner in W.P. No. 4589 of 1992 (W.A. No. 1543 of 1992), father of the petitioner in W.P. No. 4921 of 1992 (W.A. No. 1544 of 1992); father of the petitioner in W.P. No. 5285 of 1992 (W.A. No. 1545 of 1992); father of the petitioner in W.P. No. 5286 of 1992 (W.A. No. 1546 of 1992); father of the petitioner in W.P. No. 5288 of 1992 (W.A. No. 1547 of 1992) and the husband of the petitioner in W.P. No. 5287 of 1992 (W.A. No. 1548 of 1992) were employed in the Bank of Thanjavur Limited and they died in harness. The said Bank was amalgamated ...
Ramakrishna Naidu Vs. Shanmugasundaram and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-12-1993
Reported in: (1993)2MLJ172
Bellie, J.1. This second appeal is by the first defendant. The suit for declaration and injunction was dismissed by the trial court, but the appellate court decreed it.2. The two plaintiffs filed the suit alleging as follows:The suit properties belonged to the joint family of the fifth defendant and his sons-the plaintiffs, and they (plaintiffs) are now in possession of it. When the first plaintiff on 26.9.1981 went to plough the suit property the first defendant and his three-brothers-defendants 2 to 4 obstructed. It appears the fifth defendant had executed a gift deed on 3.4.1972 in respect of this property in favour of his brother's sons Madhiyazhagan and Vijayaseelan. This gift deed is void and of no effect. The said settlees appears to have executed a sale deed on 22.12.1975 in favour of the first defendant. The gift deed being void and of no effect the first defendant will not get any title under the sale deed dated 22.12.1975. Therefore the suit is Redeclaration of the plaintiff...
Ekambaranathan Chettiar Firm, Represented by Its Partner, E. Kanagasab ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-12-1993
Reported in: (1993)2MLJ20
Srinivasan, J. 1. The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition and other writ petitions are taken up with the consent of parties. This case is clearly governed by the order of the Tribunal in Appeal Nos. 24 and 25 of 1974 dated 15.10.1974 for the assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72. That was affirmed by this Court in T.C. Nos. 564 and 565 of 1975 (revision Nos. 129 and 130 of 1975). The order of this Court reads as follows: What is urged by the learned Additional Government Pleader-I is that before resale, the assessee has used the gunny bags covered by the 'C' forms by hiring them" out and that in such a case there was a contravention of the conditions in the C Form, with the result that no concessional rate would apply. It seems to us that so long as the goods which are covered by the C forms had been purchased with a view to re-sell, the conditions of the C forms have been satisfied. Nowhere it is said in the C form that the goods could not be put to any use before re-sal...
Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Collector of Cen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-1993
Reported in: 1993(43)ECC142
ORDERMishra, J.1. The petitioners herein claimed exemption for their goods from the local Excise authorities pursuant to notification dated 13.1978. It is said, however, that the goods classified as Central Excise Tariff No. 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 as amended, alone were exempted first by notification No. 55/75 CE dated 13.1975 and again, by Notification No. 62/78 CE dated 1.3.1978 petitioners, however, found that local excise authorities continued levying the duty saying that they were awaiting clarifications in the matter. It is said after several representations of the petitioners to the Collector, Central Excise, Madurai, on 165.1978 and to the Central Board of Excise on 27.11.1978, the Superintendent of Central Excise, Sankarankoil, informed them that their mills would be outside the excise control in the light of the clarifications given by the Collector of Central Excise, Madurai, under his Trade Notice No. 52/80 (5/ All other goods/NES/...
K.R. Athappa Chettiar Vs. G.R. Ramasethu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-1993
Reported in: (1994)1MLJ612
Mishra, J.1. The plaintiff/respondent G.R. Ramasethu filed a suit in O.S. No. 342 of 1971 in the Court of Subordinate Judge of Madurai and obtained a money decree. The said decree was put in execution in E.P. No. 164 of 1973 and a house property belonging to the defendant-judgment-debtor V.S. Nammalvar was auction sold and purchased by the decree-holder himself. It appears however that this house property was sold by V.S. Nammalvar to the appellant on 9.2.1972. It also appears that the auction sale of the property concerned had preceded attachment before judgment in I.A. No. 555 of 1971 in O.S. No. 342 of 1971 order dated 9.8.1971 and the decree in the suit was on 30.11.1972 followed by E.P. No. 164 of 1973 for sale of attached property in the year 1973. According to the appellant, he had in fact negotiated for the purchase and paid a part of the consideration money i.e., a sum of Rs. 10,000 by means of a cheque to V.S. Nammalvar on 28.8.1971, in pursuance of a sale agreement reached b...
Viswanathan and ors. Vs. R. Lakshmi Ammal (Deed.) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-1993
Reported in: (1993)2MLJ560
Srinivasan, J.1. A.S. No. 89 of 1983 arises out of a suit for specific performance of an agreement dated 14.12.1977 marked as Ex.A-1 between plaintiffs 1 to 4 and defendants 1 and 2. The plaintiffs are aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit. A.S. No. 85 of 1983 arises out of a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 39,150 representing the arrears of rent from 11.2.1978 to 1.8.1979 at the rate of Rs. 4,350 per mensem and interest thereon. The suit had been decreed and the aggrieved defendant is the appellants. The fifth plaintiff in the suit for specific performance is the defendant in the suit for recovery of money. Defendants 1 and 3 in the suit for specific `performance are plaintiffs 1 and 2 in the suit for recovery of money. The parties are referred in this judgment according to their ranking in the suit for specific performance. First plaintiff is the father of plaintiffs 2 to 5 and defendants 1 and 3 are the wives of the second defendant. Fourth defendant is a lessee of a portion of t...
M/S. Ganesh Bhavan and Etc. Etc. Vs. the Health Officer, Corporation o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Mad119
ORDER1. Writ Petition No. 4570 of 1993 is filed by Madras Hotels Associations represented by its Secretary and the prayer in the writ petition is to the following effect :'..... to issue a writ of prohibition orderor direction in the nature of a writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from ordering closure of the eating house/restaurants/ hotels run by the petitioners members by erroneously invoking the provisions of S. 113 of the Tamil Nadu Public Health Act which applies only to cases of possibility of transmission of infectious diseases from persons employed in hotels and in no other situations.....'2. In all other writ petitions, cyclostyled orders of the third respondent in W. P. Nos.4548, 4568 and 4570 of 1993 is being questioned. The impugned orders in these cases are dated 6-3-93 wherein the Health Officer, Corporation of Madras the third respondent has directed immediate closure of eating establishments concerned, invoking the power under S. 113(2) of the Tamil Nadu Pu...
S. Govindaraja Mudaliar Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1993
Reported in: [1994]206ITR62(Mad)
Raju J.1. The above writ petitions may be disposed of together since they relate to the same subject-matter but concerning different stages and submissions also have been made by learned counsel appearing on wither side in common. 2. Writ Petition No. 7705 of 1984 has been filed for a writ of certiorari to call for and quash the proceedings of the first respondent-Tribunal in W.T.A. Nos. 583 to 596/(Mas) of 1982, dated October 28, 1983, whereunder the first respondent, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, has finally disposed of and dismissed the appeal of the petitioner on merits. Thereupon, the petitioner filed miscellaneous applications in Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 80 and 84 to 97 of 1983, seeking rehearing of the matter, since, according to the petitioner, the earlier disposal dated October 28, 1983, without hearing learned counsel for the assessee, could not be said to be a disposal on the merits after hearing the parties. The first respondent-Tribunal rejected the miscellane...
K.M. Duraisamy Vs. Special Officer, Coimbatore Division Rural Coop. Ho ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ1086Mad; (1993)IIMLJ13
ORDER1. The first respondent/The Coimbatore Division Rural Co-operative Housing Society Limited, SLM-HSG No. 30, Avinashi 638654, Coimbatore District was without a Secretary right from its inception and consequently the work of the said society was stated to have suffered to a great extent possible. Therefore, the first respondent wanted the post of Secretary to be filled up by appointment of a proper and fit person. Nominations of persons having requisite qualifications were called for through the Employment Exchange and out of the persons so sponsored, the petitioner K. M. Duraiswamy, having the requisite qualifications was found fit to man the position and he was appointed by a resolution dated 14.2.1982, although he was above 30 years at that time and in order to relax the age qualifications it was also decided to address the Registrar to have the appointment regularised relaxing the qualifications as regards age. The petitioner was accordingly appointed. 2. While so functioning hi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »