Chennai Court December 1994 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.
Siddaraj and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)ALT(Cri)492; 1996CriLJ1024
ORDER1. These petitions coming on for hearing upon perusing the petitions and the respective Memorandum of Grounds fired in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. M. Sathyanarayanan Advocate for the petitioners in each of the petitions, and of Mr. S. Somasundarm Government Advocate (Crl. Side) on behalf of the State, the Court made the following order. The petitioners in the earlier application are accused numbers 4 to 13 and the petitioners in the other application are accused Numbers 1 to 3 in S.T.R. No. 3771 of 92 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Salem Crime Nos. 969 and 981 of 92 of Salem Town Police Station were registered against them under Sections 8 and 9 of the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930 on the allegation that on 21-10-92 at about 11.45 p.m., when the Inspector of Police, Sooramangalam in charge of Salem Town Police Station raided the Literary Society in Cherry Road, Salem Town, the petitioners in the earlier application were found playing the game 'M...
V. Lakshmi Bai Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Old Court Hall ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ658
ORDERKanakaraj, J.1. By G.O.Ms. No. 1674, Labour Department, dated 30.7.1987, the Government referred an Industrial Dispute arising between the workmen and the management of Veerasamy Motor Service, Coimbatore-9 to the Labour Court, Coimbatore. The dispute referred was whether the non-employment of about 10 workmen was justified and if not to what relief they were entitled to. However, it is not disputed that on 24.9.1986 the Union submitted a charter of demands with regard to minimum wages, permanency provision of amenities etc. Conciliation proceedings were initiated and during conciliation proceedings the management had refused to give work to some of the workmen. It is under such circumstances that the above reference had been made. The management namely Veerasami, Motor Service filed a writ petition W.P. No. 5435 of 1988 challenging the order of reference and obtained stay of further proceedings. However, the stay was vacated on 13.9.1990. Thereafter, when the dispute was pending ...
Lakshmiramapandiaraj (Died) and ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-1994
Reported in: (1995)2MLJ55
ORDER:In this office proceeding first cited, the value of lands measuring an extent of 2 grounds, 1215 sq.ft. in S.No. 1004/13 etc. in Mylapore village, Mylapore Triplicane Taluk of Madras District was fixed and approved at Rs. 60,952 (Rupees Sixty thousand nine hundred and fiftytwo only) per ground.2. The Collector of Madras in his letter second cited has now sent Draft Award (Abstract) for the lands of 2 grounds, 1,215 sq.ft. in S.No. 1004/13 etc., Mylapore Village for approval by Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration.3. The proposal was examined with the connected records. The Collector has sent the Draft Award (Abstract) for the total compensation amount of Rs. 10,99,499.30 (inclusive of land value, value of structures, 30% solatium and 12% Additional Market value).4. The value of the lands involved in this case exceeds 10 lakhs the Draft Award (Abstract) has been sent by the Collector of Madras for approval of Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Ad...
S. Sankaran Vs. Inspector, Triplicane Range, Traffic Investigation Dep ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2823
ORDER1. This petition is filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 690 of 1991 on the file of VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras. The petitioner is accused in that case for the offence under Section 304-A, 337 and 338 Indian Penal Code and Sections 184 and 185 of Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioner has stated that his car TSE 1326 involved in an accident on 6-12-90 for which the police charge-sheeted him before the VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras, that though the case was pending on the file of the learned Magistrate for nearly two years, the prosecution was never ready or produced any witness and therefore the learned Magistrate stopped the proceedings by his order dated 26-10-92 under Section 258 Code of Criminal Procedure, but to his surprise, he received a summons from the Court directing him to appear on 2-12-92 as the learned Magistrate had re-opened the case by his order dated 29-10-1992. It is further sated that the order of the l...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. P.R. Chockalingam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1994
Reported in: [1996]217ITR159(Mad)
Mishra, J.1. We do not think, after going through the statement of the case and the order of the Tribunal, that any reference was required to this Court at all, particularly when sufficient guidance is available to the WTO in the majority judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in CWT vs . K.S. Vaidyanathan : [1985]153ITR11(Mad) . 2. The WT Act has created a charge upon the 'net wealth' which is defined under s. 2(m) of the Act to mean the amount by which the aggregate value, computed in accordance with the provisions of this Act, of all the assets, wherever located, belonging to the assessee on the valuation date including assets required to be included in his net wealth as on that date under this Act, is in excess of the aggregate value of all the debts owed by the assessee on the valuation date other than - (i) debts, which, under S. 6, are not to be taken into account, (ii) debts which are secured on, or which have been incurred in relation to any property in respect of which wealth...
C. Gopal, S/O. Chinnaswamy Vs. Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Limit ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-06-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ403
Srinivasan, J.1. The defendant aggrieved by the concurrent judgments of both the courts below has preferred this second appeal. Admittedly, the defendant is a tenant under the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed a suit, O.S. No. 280 of 1991 on the file of the District Munsif, Pollachi on the footing that the defendant was a licensee and that the licence had been cancelled. That suit was dismissed on the ground that the defendant was a lessee and not a licensee. After that, the plaintiff issued a notice on 21.1.1991 through his lawyer, terminating the tenancy. According to the plaintiff, he found certain defects in that notice and issued another notice on 1.3.1991 terminating the tenancy. Thereafter, the present suit was filed. In the said suit the defendant contended that he had put up superstructure at a cost of Rs. 25,000 and that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover vacant possession from him. Both the courts below have negatived that contention and granted a decree in favour of the...
N. Kasinatha Perumal Vs. the Commissioner, Kovilpatti Municipality, Ko ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1994
Reported in: (1995)IIMLJ2
ORDERMishra, J.1. The petitioner herein was initially appointed as a Mazdoor under the Nominal Muster Roll of the engineering section of the respondent/Municipality and after working for more than six years in the said capacity selected for appointment as a Bill Collector with effect from 14.8.1977. It appears that the Government of Tamil Nadu at some level, noticed that many heads of Departments of the Government, the Chief Executive of Corporations, Boards ect., were not following the procedure that the Government had envisaged for the posts outside the purview of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and were irregularly making appointments to various posts in their respective establishments without consulting the employment exchange and on 7.11.1978, the Government issued G.O.Ms. No. 1352, Labour the Employment Department, and directed as follows :- 1. The appointment to the posts outside the purview of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission made upto the period of 31.2.1977, ...
N. Kasinatha Perumal Vs. the Commissioner, Kovilpatti Municipality
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-1994
Reported in: (1995)2MLJ2
ORDERMishra, J.1. The petitioner herein was initially appointed as a Mazdoor under the Nominal Muster Roll of the engineering section of the respondent/Municipality and after working for more than six years in the said capacity selected for appointment as a Bill Collector with effect from 14.8.1977. It appears that the Government of Tamil Nadu at some level, noticed that many heads of Departments of the Government, the Chief Executives of Corporations, Boards, etc., were not following the procedure that the Government had envisaged for the posts outside the purview of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and were irregularly making appointments to various posts in their respective establishments without consulting the employment exchange and on 7.11.1978, the Government issued G.O.Ms. No. 1352, Labour and Employment Department, and directed as follows:1. The appointments to the posts outside the purview of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission made upto the period of 31.12.1977,...
P.L. Finance and Investments Ltd. and Another Vs. Appropriate Authorit ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-1994
Reported in: [1995]215ITR677(Mad)
Raju, J. 1. The above writ petition has been filed for the following relief : 'To issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ, call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent dated November 30, 1993, bearing Reference No. A. 4/MDS/11/93-94 and quash the same and direct the first respondent to issue a certificate of no objection as per section 269UL(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and pass such further or other orders as this court may deem fit.' 2. The petitioners, in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, state that they have entered into an agreement on February 11, 1993, with respondents Nos. 2 to 4 to purchase from them their undivided two-thirds share in the properties bearing Door Nos. 63 and 64, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Madras-600 004, and property in the village of Pudur in Naidupet Mandal, Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh. The sale consideration for the conveyance of the two-...
Jeeva Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. N. Subramani and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-1994
Reported in: 1996ACJ152
M. Srinivasan, J.1. The contention of the appellant is that the evidence of Kumaresan, P.W. 2, who is the eyewitness has been believed by the Tribunal wrongly inasmuch as the evidence of the very same person has been disbelieved by the Magistrate in the criminal proceedings against the driver. But the judgment in the criminal proceeding was not even produced before the Tribunal. An application is filed here in C.M.P. No. 17872 of 1994 for admitting the judgment of the Magistrate as additional evidence in this appeal. We dismiss the said application for two reasons: (1) There is no explanation in the affidavit filed in support of the petition to meet the requirements of Order 41, Rule 27, Civil Procedure Code. The judgment of the criminal court was delivered on 11.6.1993 and the certified copy of the said order was obtained on 22.6.1993. The claim petition was disposed of by the Tribunal on 2.8.1994-one year and two months later. In spite of availability of such a long time, the appella...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »