Chennai Court February 1995 Judgments
A. Balasubramaniam Vs. the Secretary to Government Education Departmen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Mad95
ORDERK. A. Swami, C. J. 1. The Writ appeals arise out of orders refusing to pass interim orders in Writ Petitions 12487 and 12731 of 1994. When the writ appeals came up for consideration, we thought it necessary to hear the writ petitions themselves. We accordingly, directed both writ petitions to be posted along with the writ appeals. Accordingly, they are posted. We have heard both sides in all these four matters.2. In the writ petitions, the petitioners sought for quashing clause 2.6 of the 'Information and instruction to candidates for second year B. E. Decree Course Admission, 1994, issued by the Department of Technical Education, Tamil Nadu, on the ground that the upper age limit prescribed under clause 2.6 of the aforesaid information and instruction to the candidates is violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution and also affects Art. 21 of the Constitution.3. Having regard to the contentions raised on both sides, the following point arisesfor consideration :--Whether clause 2.6 o...
Tag this Judgment!V. Shanthanalakshmi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Mad219
ORDER1. The petitioner who belongs to backward community has filed this writ petition for a Writ of Madamus directing the respondents to publish the merit list of selected candidates for the seats reserved in the cateogry of 'deserted women' and allot one seat to the petitioner for the M.B.B.S. course for the academic year 1994-95, stating that on 3-12-1989 she was married to one C. P. Easwaramoorthy; because of the misbehaviour and cruelty of her husband she could not live with him; at the time of her marriage she had completed 10th standard only, and she could not continue her studiesafter marriage. It is submitted that the petitioner was forcibly driven out of the family from her husband within six months from the date of her marriage. Thereafter she is residing with her parents. After driving her husband used to live with one Baby and all efforts made by the parents and well-wishers of the petitioner for conciliation ended in futile. On the contrary her husband married the said Bab...
Tag this Judgment!V. Shanthanalakshmi Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Mad307; II(1995)DMC648
ORDER1. The petitioner who belongs to backward community has filed this writ petition for a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents to publish the merit list of selected candidates for the seats reserved in the category of 'deserted woman' and allot one seat to the petitioner for the M.B.B.S. course for the academic year 1994-95, stating that on 3-12-1989 she was married to one C-P. Easwaramoorthy; because of the misbehaviour and cruelty of her husband she could not live with him; at the time of her marriage she had completed 10th standard only, and she could not continue her studies after marriage. It is submitted that the petitioner was forcibly driven out of the family from her husband within six months from the date of her marriage. Thereafter she is residing with her parents. After driving her out her husband used to live with one Baby and all efforts made by the parents and well-wishers of the petitioner for conciliation ended in futile. On the contrary her husband married, the sa...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. R. Harikrishna Nadar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: [1995]216ITR65(Mad)
Thanikkachalam, J.1. In compliance with the orders of this court dated November 2, 1981, the Tribunal referred the following question of law said to arise out of the order of the Tribunal under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was within its powers in setting aside the penalty order passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 1972-73 and restoring the matter to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration after the disposal of the assessment appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ?' 2. The assessee is an individual. For the assessment year 1972-73, in the assessment there were additions of Rs. 59,650 as understatement of cost of construction of a building and Rs. 20,000 as unexplained cash credit. Proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated for levy of penalty. The matter was refer...
Tag this Judgment!Madura Coats Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Madurai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: 1995(51)ECC55; 1995(79)ELT567(Mad)
ORDER1. The question that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is whether the goods described as tyre cord fabric of high tenacity yarn of polyamides or polyester. In Heading No. 59.02 in Chapter 59. Section XI of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, refer to the processed fabric. Section XI of the Act is titled Textiles and Textile Articles. The chapter heading of Chapter 59, is 'Impregnated, coated, covered or laminated, textile fabrics : Textile Articles of a kind suitable for industrial use'. 2. 'High Tenacity Yarn' is defined in Note 4 of the notes to Sec. XI as 'For the purposes of this Section, 'High tenacity yarn' means yarn having a tenacity, expressed in cN/Tex (Centrinetions per tex) greater than the following : Single yarn of nylon or other polyamides, or ofpolyesters 60cN/texMultiple (folded) or cabled yarn or nylon orother polymides or of polyesters 55cN/texSingle multiple (folded) or cable yarn ofviscose rayon. 27cN/tex 3. Tyre cord fabric is also regarded as a r...
Tag this Judgment!S. Kannan Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs, Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: 1995(78)ELT419(Mad)
ORDER1. The writ petition is for the issue of certiorari to quash a show cause notice issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, dated 11-11-1993, to the petitioner and 8 others. 2. The petitioner came to be implicated while making investigations against certain persons who were involved in the illegal export of sandalwood logs/billets etc. In the criminal cases directed against the said third parties, the matter had come up to this Court in Crl. O.P. Nos. 5540, 5542 and 5922 of 1993. While dismissing those petitions this Court had observed that it was better if the C.B.I. had taken up the investigation, because there was some suspicion as to the involvement of certain Customs officials also. It is under those circumstances that the impugned show cause notice came to be served on the petitioner calling upon him to submit his explanation. Similar show cause notice had been issued to the three persons who had filed the Crl. O.Ps. before this Court and certain others also. The sho...
Tag this Judgment!R. Palaniappan Vs. the Regional Transport Officer and 2 ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: 1995(1)CTC191; (1995)IIMLJ206
ORDERJayasimha Babu, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Regional Transport Officer, Madras 35 dated 28-12-1994 by which the said authority, by endorsing a copy of that order to the petitioner required him to pay the motor vehicles tax for the goods carrier TSC 2160 in the sum of Rs. 30,500/- as home tax for the period from 1-10-1992 to 31-12-1993 and composite tax of Rs. 93,250/- payable to other states for the period from 1-10-89 to 31-3-94. It is not in dispute that this vehicle has a national permit whose validity was upto 25-4-1994. It is also not in dispute that the previous owner of the vehicle had not applied for authorisation under Rule 17 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules read with Section 88 Clause 14 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the period subsequent to 1-4-1990.2. The petitioner has averred that he purchased the vehicle at an auction held by the second respondent, The Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited, which had financed the third res...
Tag this Judgment!Ramalingam Vs. Dhamodaran and 20 ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: 1995(1)CTC215
ORDERRengasamy, J.1. This revision is against the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Arcot at Cuddaore in Crl.M.P. No. 776/92 in CC. No. 8/92 dismissing the petition filed by the complaint under Section 209 read with Section 323 Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The petitioner filed a complait before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate alleging mischief attrocitics and robbery on account of political animosity. This complaint has been taken on file by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and after examining 9 witnesses on the prosecution side, the complainant filed this petition under Sections 209 and 323 Code of Criminal Procedure to commit this case to Sessions Court as the evidence discloses that offence has been committed under Section 395 Indian Penal CodeThis petition has been dismissed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and hence this revision3. The learned counsel for the petitioner represents that there are specific allegations in the complaint for the ...
Tag this Judgment!R. Vinothkumar Vs. the Secretary, Selection Committee and 3 ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: 1995(1)CTC401; (1995)IIMLJ158
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. I have had the advantage of reading the judgments of my learned brothers. I am unable to persuade myself to agree with the conclusion arrived at by them through I am bound to accept one part of the reasoning of Raju, J., in view of a judgment of the Supreme Court, which came to my knowledge a few days back, thanks to a Senior Advocate who appeared before me in another case.2. I was a party to the Division Bench which decided A. Arul Latha Gold v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and Ors. (W.P.No. 14308 of 1994 - Order dated 29-11-1994 = 1995 (I) CTC 5). At that time, the earlier judgment of the First Bench of this Court in R. Maheswari v. The Secretary, Selection Committee, Tamil Nadu Professional Courses, Medical/Para-Medical Courses, 1994-95 (W.A.No. 1347 of 1994 Judgment dated 11-11-1994) was not brought to the notice of the Bench. Nor the Bench was made aware of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Inder Chand Jain 19...
Tag this Judgment!R. Vinoth Kumar Vs. the Secretary, Selection Committee, Sabarmathi Hos ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: (1995)2MLJ158
ORDERJanarthanam, J.1. Challenging the selection of students for Professional Course for the academic year 1994-95, a batch of writ petitions C.S.R. Bhupeshkar v. The Secretary, Selection Committee, Madras and Anr. W.P. No. 12517 of 1994 etc., batch of cases had been filed and they were heard at length, by a Division Bench of this Court, comprising one of us (Raju, J.) and AR. Lakshmanan, J. By a common order dated 15.11.1994, the said Bench referred those matters to a Full Bench on the following reasoning:14. After careful consideration of all these we are of the view that these writ petitions deserve as also are required to be considered by a larger Bench than a Division Bench. Some of the issues particularly one relating to the reservation in excess of 50%, the validity of T.N. Act 45 of 1994 and the applicability of reservation policy to Payment Seats, involve substantial questions of Law relating to the interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution and are of great general ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »