Chennai Court September 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.
S. Balasubramanian Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ42
ORDERRaju, J.1. These two writ petitions have been filed by the very same petitioner who, during the relevant period of time, was the Editor of 'Ananda Vikadan' a Tamil weekly having its registered office at No. 758, Anna Salai, Madras-2. W.P. No. 4203 of 1987 has been filed for a writ of declaration declaring that the resolution passed by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly dated 4.4.1987 sentencing the petitioner to three months rigorous imprisonment as unconstitutional, null and void, illegal and unenforceable. W.P. No. 4202 of 1987 has been filed for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to compensate the petitioner for the alleged flagrant violation claimed to have been committed of the petitioner's fundamental rights on account of imposing of a rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. The controversy between the parties hereto has its origin centering around a cartoon published on the outer wrapper rather the front cover page of the Tamil Weekly 'Ananda Vikadan' bearing ...
M. Rathinam and anr. Vs. the Tamil Nadu State Housing Board and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ604
Mishra, J.1. Petitioner, B. Rangarajan, in W.P. No. 5137 of 1991 has sought for the regularisation of his services with the respondent - Tamil Nadu Housing Board in pursuance of the order of the Government of Tamil Nadu in G.O.Ms. No. 1603, dated 7.12.1988 read with G.O.Ms. No. 400, dated 2.5.1990 and for consequential benefits.2. Petitioner, M. Rathinam, in W.P. No. 4603 of 1985 has also made a similar prayer and a further prayer to call for the records on the file of the 3rd respondent, Executive Engineer and Administrative Officer, Special Division of the T.N.H.B., Coimbatore-21, and to quash the memo A1/4841/ 82, dated 16.2.1985.3. Petitioner, Rangarajan, has stated that he was employed on Nominal Muster Roll (N.M.R.) basis on 26.2.1979 in the service of the respondent - board at its Coimbatore Housing Unit under the Executive Engineer of the Special Division. He served to the satisfaction of all concerned and earned two favourable certificates from the Executive Engineer - one dat...
J. Sampath Kumar Vs. Bar Council of India Represented by Its Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-1994
Reported in: (1994)2MLJ651
Raju, J.1. This batch of writ petitions involve the constitutional validity of Rule 9 in Chapter III of Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules introduced by the Resolution of the Bar Council of India Ms. 64 of 1993 dated 22.8.1993 and published in the Gazette of India dated 25.9.1993 disentitling a person who has completed the age of 45 years on the date on which he submits his application for his enrolment as Advocate to the State Bar Council.2. Common submission have been made by some of the learned Counsel, which have been adopted by the others, to which detailed reference will be made at the appropriate stage hereinafter. To have an understanding of the problem, the factual position in some of the writ petitions may be adverted to.3. W.P. No. 4116 of 1994 has been filed for a writ of declaration declaring the Resolution ( No. 64 of 1993) dated 22.8.1993 of the Bar Council of India as ultra vires the Advocates Act, 1961 (Central Act 25 of 1961)(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act...
Gnanadurai Vs. Suseelammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Mad133
ORDER1. This petition was filed to condone the delay of 684 days in filing the revision. The auction prochaser-Decree-holder is the petitioner herein. The respondent is the Judgment-Debtor. The Judgment-debtor filed an application under Section 47 of Civil Procedure Code questioning the execution, discharge or satisfaction of thedecree obtained by the decree-holder. The above said application was allowed. Thereafter the auction purchaser, who is the petitioner herein filed an appeal C.M.A. No. 14 of 1988 against the order passed in Application filed under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code. The said application was ultimately dismissed by the appellate Court stating that only a revision will lie against the order passed in application filed under Section 47 of Civil Procedure Code and directed the auction-purchaser to approach the proper Court for filing the revision. It is thereafter the present revision was filed.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the ...
Cap. M. Gopalakrishnan Vs. LeafIn India Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1994
Reported in: [1995]83CompCas351(Mad)
Rengasami, J. 1. The above criminal original petition is filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure code to quash the proceedings in E.O.C.C. No. 252 of 1993, on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, E.O.I., Egmore, Madras-8. 2. The petitioner, who is the accused in the above said complaint, was the president of Leafin India Limited, Hyderabad. The petitioner in his capacity as precedent was entitled to have vehicle for his use and an air-conditioned Premier Padmini car, bearing Registration No. AP.9-T 6214, was given to him for his use. Now his services have been dispensed with. The complainant-company issued notice to him to had over the said car, which was not complied with by the petitioner. Hence, invoking section 630 of the Companies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), this petition has been filed to direct the petitioner to return the vehicle. 3. The petitioner in his petition to quash the proceedings has raised two contentions, viz., that he i...
Malleswara Finance and Investments Co. P. Ltd. Vs. Company Law Board a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1994
Reported in: [1995]82CompCas836(Mad)
S.S. Subramani, J.1. Writ Appeal No. 806 of 1994. - This writ appeal is by the petitioner against the judgment of the learned single judge in Writ Petition No. 19256 of 1993, dated May 10, 1994. This writ appeal was heard along with C. M. A. Nos. 743 of 1993 and 875 of 1994, since they are connected with the same matter. 2. C. M. A. No. 743 of 1993 is by the third respondent in the writ petition and C. M. A. No. 875 of 1994 is by the eighteenth respondent. 3. The relevant facts in the writ appeal are as follows : According to this appellant, as per the resolution dated April 30, 1992, of the third respondent-company, it was resolved to increase the share capital from 5,000 equity shares to 25,000 equity shares having a value of Rs. 10 per share. As per article 6 of the articles of association, the same was offered to all the shareholders of the company. Since two shareholders did not agree to purchase the same within the period, the same was offered to the eighteenth respondent, anothe...
P. Sabbaraj Vs. the State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3440
ORDER1. This petition is filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 5/88 pending on the file of the VII Additional Special Judge, Madras. 2. The petitioner was working as Junior Accountant in the office of the Director of Accounts, Tamil Nadu Postal Circle, situated in Commander-in-Chief Road, Madras, and the respondent police has filed a charge-sheet against him for the offences under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161 of Indian Penal Code alleging that on or about 13-10-1987, he demanded and collected Rs. 500/- from one Natarajan as illegal gratification promising to secure a job for him at P.W.D. office at Vellore, by abusing his position as a public servant. 3. The prosecution has been launched against this petitioner on the complaint of one C. Natarajan. The said Natarajan has alleged that he is an educated unemployed person, that he came to know through a person that this petition...
Continental Exporters Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1994
Reported in: 1996(53)ECC64; 1995(77)ELT801(Mad)
ORDER1. The above writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorarified mandamus or other appropriate writ calling for the records of the respondent culminating in his order dated 15-6-1987 bearing Ref. No. S. 59/128/87 Gr-4, quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to release goods covered by IGM, No. 25/87 and Line Nos. 179, 180 and 181 on payment of 50% of the differential duty under the Heading 7317.00 of the I Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 2. The petitioner claims to be engaged in the manufacture of ready-made garments for export to various countries and imported a consignment of staples from Max Co. Ltd. and when it submitted the necessary Bill of Entry on the arrival of goods at Madras Port for clearance, it classified the goods under the Heading 73.17 of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, since according to the petitioner, the staples were iron and steel articles. It is also stated in the affidavit filed in support of the present writ petition ...
J. Jayalakshmi and ors. Vs. Vasavi Transport Represented by Its Managi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-1994
Reported in: (1995)1MLJ187
ORDER1. The appeal is posted to-day for admission. Before the matter was heard, learned Counsel for the appellant withdraws the appeal and hence it is dismissed as withdrawn.2. Counsel for the appellant prays for a direction for refund of court-fee paid on the memorandum of appeal. Even before the appeal was taken up for admission, the appeal is withdrawn. We find that a sum of Rs. 19,372.50 has been paid as court-fee. It is a very heavy amount and in view of the withdrawal of the appeal, it would be in the interests of justice to grant a refund. But, there is no provision in the Tamil Nadu Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act to enable the court to give a direction for refund of court-fee. However, we direct the appellant to make an application to the Government exgratia and misericordia dominiregis ('by favour' and 'by the mercy of our Lord the King''). For this purpose, certificate will be granted to the appellants by the Registry that the appeal memorandum was stamped with a court fe...
S.K. Sundaram Vs. Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Home A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Mad107
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the order of a learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein as not maintainable. The writ petition was posted before him on a noteby the Registry questioning the maintainability of the Writ Petition. The learned Judge, after hearing the arguments of the appellant, passed an elaborate order dealing with his contentions and negativing the same.2. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for issue of mandamus or direction in the nature of a writ directing respondents 1 and 2 viz., the Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs and the Director of Central Bureau of Investigation, Government of India to enquire and ascertain and name or names of persons who have approached the third respondent, who was a Judge of this Court at that time, in connection with Habeas Corpus Petitions Nos. 903, 906 and 907 of 1994 before pronouncing orders on 17-8-1994.3. The relevant averments found in the af...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »