Chennai Court March 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.
Meena A. Bharwani Vs. Union of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1994
Reported in: 1994(72)ELT17(Mad)
ORDER1. The petitioner had come to India to show her new-born child which was only about seven months old to her parents. It is stated that her husband is well placed in life and she was carrying sufficient funds for her stay in India with her parents. The journey from Tokyo to Madras had taken an unduly long time and the petitioner, had been re-routed through Colombo due to certain unavoidable reasons. At the time when she arrived at the Madras Air-Port, she is said to have been in a condition of exhaustion and was in a hurry to get through the Customs. She was wearing and having in the baggages, Gold and Diamond studded jewellery and had not declared the same to the authorities. According to the petitioner there was no ulterior motive for the non-declaration of the jewellery. By an order dated 7-7-1989, the Additional Collector of Customs confiscated the Gold Jewellery weighing 52 grams valued at Rs. 4,680/- and diamond studded jewellery valued at Rs. 25,400/- under Section 111 (d) a...
Varuni Chemicals (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Madurai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1994
Reported in: 1994(71)ELT678(Mad)
ORDER1. By consent the writ petitions themselves are taken up for final disposal.2. W.P. No. 14229 of 1993 is to quash the order of the second respondent, dated 2-11-1992, in and by which the Tribunal directed the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of rupees ten lakhs towards the tax and a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards penalty and similar amounts in respect of certain others in respect of penalty, on or before 31-12-1992, as a condition for taking the appeal on file and hearing the same on merits. W.P. No. 14230 of 1993 is for the issue of a Writ of certiorari to quash the order of the second respondent, dated 31-12-1992, in and by which the Tribunal recorded that the amount directed to be paid under the order, dated 2-11-1992, had not been paid, and therefore the appeal was liable to be dismissed, and accordingly dismissed the appeal. A few facts may be stated before disposing of these two writ petitions. While making an order on 2-11-1992 the second respondent had taken into account the ...
K. Murugesan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-1994
Reported in: (1997)IMLJ398
K.A. Swami, C.J.1. This tax appeal is preferred under section 37 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), read with rule 30 of the Rules framed thereunder, against the order of the Joint Commissioner (SMR) (CT) dated November 17, 1992, passed in reference No. T2/N3/33006/90. 2. The assessee sold certain articles to Kumbakonam Municipality. On the turnover, covering those sales, concessional rate of sales tax under the Government Order P. No. 303, dated March 26, 1981 (with effect from April 1, 1981) is claimed, on the ground that municipality is no other than the department of Government and therefore the sales to the municipality fall within the purview of the aforesaid notification. The Joint Commissioner has negatived the contention. It has been held that the turnover of Rs. 53,475 relating to supply of electrical goods to Kumbakonam Municipal Council is not eligible for concessional rate of tax at 4 per cent and the decision in Troks Pha...
S. Radhakrishnan and Others Vs. Govt. of Tamil Nadu and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Mad8
ORDER1. These four writ petitions raise an interesting question which has a considerable impact on the present day developments of land and/or building in the City of Madras vis-a-vis. The Tamil Nadu Town and Country planning Act 1971 and the Development Control Rules. In particular the construction of flats by promoters offering attractive benefits and convenient living and attracting purchasers and allottees and later on going back on the promises and causing all kinds of inconvenience to the flat owners, is one of the aspects which is brought out in this case.2. The petitioners in W.P. No. 5670 of 1988 claim to be the flat purchasers in respect of two flats, one in the ground floor and the other in the third floor of Door No. 16, Saravana Mudali Street, T. Nagar, Madras-17. Respondents 4 to 10 are the other flat owners who got themselves impleaded in these writ petitions. I do not think that it is seriously disputed that the writ petitioners are speaking for and on behalf of one R. ...
S. Pechiyammal Vs. N. Gnanasundaram Nadar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Mad372
ORDER1. The civil revision petition itself is taken up for disposal by consent of parties. The civil revision petition is directed against the order in E. P. No.47 of 1991 in O.S. No. 357 of 1970 on the file of the learned principal District Munsif, Padmanabhapuram, dismissing the execution petition as barred by limitation.2. E. P. No. 548 of 1979 was filed in O. S. No. 357 of 1970 for realising the decree amount in the suit for recovery of mortgage amount. Final decree was passed on 7-11-1973. In the meanwhile, the judgment-debtor filed a suit O. S. No. 331 of 1975 for partition in respect of properties, including the mortgaged property, which is the subject matter of O. S. No. 357 of 1970 and a decree was passed in the said partition suit on 30-6-1976. It is the case of the petitioner herein that the decree in O. S. No. 331 of 1975 was passed ex parte, without his knowledge. On coming to know of the same, the petitioner herein filed O. S. No. 730 of 1981 for setting aside the ex part...
Kaliyaperumal Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ3387
ORDERJanarthanam, J.1. The appellant was the accused in S.C. No. 149 of 1985 on the file of the Court of Session West Thanjavur Division at Thanjavur. He was found guilty for an offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, convicted thereunder and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the present action has been resorted to by the appellant-accused. 2. Brief facts are :- a. Accused and PW 1 are brothers. They are residents of Alankottai Village, situate within the jurisdictional limits of Paravakottai Police Station. They inherited certain ancestral properties, subsequent to the death of their father. b. Some five years prior to the occurrence, which event happened on 18-7-1985, PW 1, in order to the out his livelihood, migrated from the Village and settled down at Madras. He was transacting business in peas and his brother the accused was looking after the ancestral properties. c. Three years prior to the occurrence, PW 1, got marr...
Consumer Action Group Represented by Its Trustee Vs. the Union of Indi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-1994
Reported in: (1994)1MLJ481
ORDERKanakaraj, J.1. Not a day passes with a conference on pollution control and environmental management at some part of the world or atleast an article in the Newspaper and Weekly Magazines about the importance of the subject or the lack of awareness on the part of the citizens, the Government and the Governmental Authorities. The subject has assumed the Worldwide importance because it threatens the very life and existence of the human race. That is precisely the reason why several enactments have been passed by the Central and State Governments on the control of water pollution, air pollution, noise pollution as well as the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, etc.2. The petitioner in this case is a trust set up for the purpose of representing consumers and fighting their cause in protecting public health, public safety and the performance of public duties in this regard. The deponent of the affidavit is a trustee of the said trust and is a well-known member of the Bar. It is stated ...
Chennal Kothawal Chavadi Thakkali Vyabarigal Sangam Vs. Vice Chairman, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Mad101
ORDER1. The petitioner Sangam is having 200 members on its roll and all of them are dealing in wholesale business in tomatoes at the Kothwal Chavadi Market, Madras. All the members of the Sangam are being allotted shops in the newly built Koyambedu wholesale Market Complex. Their grievance is that the allotments are likely to be made on 8th and 9th of March and their request for allotment in a contiguous place for all the members has not been considered by the respondents. On 2-3-1994 they have given a representation to the third respondent seeking allotment of shops for all the wholesale traders at a separate place in a contiguous manner. No reply has been received to this representation. But the drawal of lot for choosing the particular shop for allotment isto be made on 8-3-1994 and 9-3-1994. I am unable to understand the right, which is sought to be enforced on behalf of the petitioner Sangam. There may be advantages and disadvantages in the members of the petitioner Sangam having ...
N. Velayutham Vs. Sri Ganesh Steel Syndicate
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1994
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas785(Mad)
Pratap Singh J.1. The accused in C. C. No. 6472 of 1991 on the file of the VIIth Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras, has filed this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, praying to call for the records in the above case and quash the same. 2. The short facts are: The respondent has filed the private complaint against the petitioner for an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which I shall hereafter refer to as 'the Act'). The allegations in it are briefly as follows: 3. On the request made by the accused, the complainant supplied goods of a total value of Rs. 1,88,093. The accused asked for three months' time to pay a portion of the value of the goods and gave two post-dated cheques dated May 20, 1991, and June 20, 1991, for a sum of Rs. 48,755. When presented, those cheques were returned with the remark 'exceeds arrangement'. Thereafter, the accused was contacted by the complainant and the accused pleaded time to honour the commitments a...
Durai Vs. Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-08-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ78
Mishra, J.1. Durai, petitioner, has been detained under section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), under the orders of the District Magistrate and Collector of Chengai-M.G.R. District at Kancheepuram. The grounds of detention referred to two incidents of crime relating to distillation of arrack and punishments of fine imposed upon him for the said offences. He has been detained, however, after his arrest in a raid in the morning of 25th July 1993 by a Prohibition Enforcement Wing of the Police in the District in connection with a case of selling illegally distilled arrack mixed with Chloral Hydrate. It is said the two sample bottles and ganja, which he was selling, were sent for chemical examination and analyst's report has revealed that in the sample he detected the presence of 116.0 mg. of Chloral Hydrate per 100 ml. of ar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »