Chennai Court December 1996 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.
Anjuman-e-palah-millan Dharul Hifaz by Its Trustees, V.M. Abdulla Bash ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1996
Reported in: (1997)1MLJ378
ORDERS.M. Abdul Wahab, J.1. C.R.P. No. 1815 of 1996 is against the order dated 29.2.1996 in M.P. No. 158 of 1996 in R.C.A. No. 458 of 1990 on therfile of the VII Judge of Small Causes Court, Madras.2. C.R.P. No. 1817 of 1996 is against the order dated 29.2.1996 in M.P. No. 157 of 1996 in R.C.A. No. 457 of 1990, on the file of the VII Judge of Small Causes Court, Madras.3. M.P. No. 158 of 1996 has been filed before the appellate authority under Sections 144 and 151 of Civil Procedure Code, for redelivery of the building to the respondent herein. Similarly M.P. No. 157 of 1996 was filed for similar relief in respect of another building.4. The petitioners herein are the landlords in both the Rent Control Appeals and the petitions mentioned above. Since, the petitioner and the respondent are the same persons in both the civil revision petitions and the facts and law are similar in both the petitions, both the civil revision petitions are taken up together for consideration with the consent...
The Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited Vs. S. Albert and Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1996
Reported in: (1997)1MLJ623
K. Sampath, J.1. The appeal arises out of arbitration proceedings. The Arbitrators appointed by the parties having disagreed regarding the invoking of penal clause and the payment of interest, the matter went before the Umpire who by his award dated 25.4.1990 held that the appellant/opposite party would be entitled to invoke the penal clause in respect of 503.49 Mts. valued at Rs. 8,60,907.20 and that the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs. 3,06,558 with interest at 12% per annum on the said amount from the date of award till date of decree. The claimant had claimed interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 1984. The claimant preferred two original petitions, viz., O.P. No. 394 of 1991 seeking permission of the court to file the award before the court; O.P. No. 517 of 1992 under Sees.30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act to set aside the award of the Umpire and to enhance the award amount to Rs. 3,99,098 with interest at 12% per annum from 1.4.1984; and an Application No. 4607 of 19...
Sherwood Educational Society Vs. Abid Namazie and Two ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-24-1996
Reported in: (1997)1MLJ445
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. Tenant in R.C.O.P. No. 4698 of 1983, on the file of XI Judge, Court of Small Causes at Madras, having rent control jurisdiction, is the revision petitioner.2. Respondents filed the present eviction petition on the allegation that the building requires immediate demolition and reconstruction.3. Material averments in the petition may be stated as follows:Petitioners (in eviction petition) and their late mother Hussain Begum Namazie are joint owners of the non-residential bungalow having an area of more than 10 grounds. The same was let out to the petitioner herein on a monthly rent of Rs. 2,400 exclusive of electric and other charges, payable on the 1st of every succeeding English calendar month. Landlords filed a petition under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, for fixation of fair rent, and by order dated 15.12.1979, Rent Controller fixed the fair rent at Rs. 4,200 per month both parties were not satisfied with the decision of...
M.S. Karuppanna Nadar Vs. Nariyan Alias Shanmugham (Deceased) and 2 or ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)CTC309
ORDERT.N. Vallinayagam, J. 1. The plaintiff who lost in both the courts is the appellant. At the time of admitting the Second Appeal and while framing the substantial question of law this court observed as follows:-'The defendant resisted the suit originally contending that he is in possession of the entire suit property, but the courts below found that the defendant is in possession of 30 cents of land out of the suit property. Though before the lower appellate Court the plaintiff claimed that even if the defendant has established his case of possession of 30 cents of land, the plaintiff is entitled to claim injunction for the balance of the suit extent...........The question is whether it is open to the court to grant an injunction for a lesser extent than the extent claimed by the plaintiff.'2. Originally the suit was for permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men, servants or agents from interfering in any manner with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment o...
Vijayalakshmi Balasubramanian Vs. R. Balasubramanian
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: I(1998)DMC210; (1997)IIMLJ370
P. Sathasivam, J.1. Against the order of judicial separation in a petition filed by the husband in O.P. No. 1 of 1988 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the wife has filed the present appeal. Originally the husband has filed O.P. No. 450 of 1982 before the City Civil Court, Madras for grant of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of desertion as well as cruelty. After the formation of the Family Court, the said O.P. has been transferred to the Family Court and numbered as O.P. 1 of 1988. Though in the petition it is mentioned as under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, actually the relief is sought for under Sections 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The case of the husband as seen from the petition is narrated hereunder :Both the appellant and the respondent got married on 6.7.1969 at Madras. The marriage was an arranged one. Even during the initial few days after the marriage the petitioner (husband) was shocked and pained by ...
Smt. Sokkuthai Ammal and anr. Vs. Pandiaraj and 2 ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)CTC200; (1997)IIMLJ136
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. This Second Appeal is against the Judgment and decree dated 2-8-1996, in A.S.No. 2 of 1993, on the file of Principal Sub-Judge, Srivilliputhur, confirming the Judgment and decree dated 30-7-1983, made on O.S.No. 64 of 1993, on the file of District Munsif, Aruppukottai.2. The appellants are the defendants 2 and 3 in the suit in O.S.No. 64 of 1983, for a final decree for redemption by directing the defendants to receive a sum of Rs. 800 deposited in Court and execute reconveyance. The respondents 1 to 3 are the 2nd plaintiff, 1st defendant and the legal representative of the deceased 1st plaintiff respectively. The plaintiffs, executed a deed of mortgage by conditional sale on 27.7.1978 in favour of the defendants 2 and 3 for Rs. 800. The period fixed for repayment of money is three years. The defendants were put in possession of suit property, on the date of the execution of the document. Even before the expiry of the period of three years, i.e., in July ...
R.K. Koteeswaran, Proprietor, Padmavathy Constructions Vs. General Man ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: 1997(1)CTC609
ORDERK.A. Swami, C.J.1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 20th November, 1996 passed by the learned single Judge dismissing Writ Petition No. 16980 of 1996 in which the petitioner sought for quashing the communication dated 12.7.1996, bearing No. J/W- 148/2382/I issued by the Divisional Railway Manager (Works) Palakkad. The said communication reads thus:-The work PGD/W Sec. Deen Screening and making up deficiency of ballast from Km. 560/6 to 564/1 on D/L including making up deficiency in points and classings @ PLL LDY & OTP was entrusted to the above firm (Contractors) as per Agt.No. J/505 of 28.12.1994. Since they have failed to fulfil the contractual obligation and to complete the work, the Agreement has been terminated at his 'Risk and cost' as per Clause 62 of G.C.C. Pending assessment of the extra cost that is likely to be incurred by the Railway in getting the balance work executed through agency you are requested to withhold any payment due to the said firm (Contr...
Sokkuthai Ammal and anr. Vs. Pandiaraj and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ136
Karpagavinayagam, J.1. This second appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 2.8.1996, in A.S. No. 2 of 1993, on the file of Principal Sub-Judge, Srivilliputhur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.7.1983, made in O.S. No. 64 of 1993, on the file of District Munsif, Aruppukottai.2. The appellants are the defendants 2 and 3 in the suit in O.S. No. 64 of 1983, for a final decree for redemption by directing the defendants to receive a sum of Rs. 800 deposited in court and execute reconveyance. The respondents 1 to 3 are the 2nd plaintiff, 1st defendant and the legal representative of the deceased 1st plaintiff respectively. The plaintiffs executed a deed of mortgage by conditional sale on 27.7.1978 in favour of the defendants 2 and 3 for Rs. 800. The period fixed for repayment of money is three years. The defendants were put in possession of suit property, on the date of the execution of the document. Even before the expiry of the period of three years, i.e., in July, 1981, ...
Pandi and Another Vs. the State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-18-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2964
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment in S.C. No. 129 of 1986 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai convicting the appellants for the offences under Sections 459, 302 read with 34 and 392 read with 34, I.P.C. and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years, life sentence and five years respectively directing the sentences to run concurrently. 2. The crux of the accusation against the appellants is that on 16-11- 1985 at about 8 a.m., the appellants effected entry into the house of the deceased Vijreswari Ammal situated at door No. 25, Veeraraghavaperumal Street, Tirunagar and murdered the deceased by strangulating her by placing a pillow on her face, tying it with a saree and also tying her hands and legs with the body with the same saree and committed theft of gold jewels of which gold chain weighing about 3 1/2 sovereigns, gold bangles about 5 1/4 sovereigns, a foreign set tape recorder and Rs. 35/- cash all worth about ...
The High Court of Judicature at Madras, Rep. by the Registrar Vs. T.S. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-18-1996
Reported in: 1997(3)CTC1; (1997)IMLJ327
ORDERShivaraj Patil, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 20.9.1996 passed by a learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 2252 of 1995.2. The respondent herein joined the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Services as District Munsif, and at present he is a District Judge, Grade I. When he was serving as a District and Sessions Judge of Ramanathapuram, at Madurai he was served with a show cause notice on 18.12.1991 asking him why disciplinary action should not be taken against him based on certain allegations. He submitted his explanation to the same on 25.3.1991. The explanation so submitted was found not satisfactory. 18 charges were framed against him. Two Honourable Judges appointed by the Honourable the Chief Justice conducted enquiry and submitted their findings on 16.4.1992 on the charges. Thereafter the respondent received a communication Roc. 77/90/Con.B2 dated Nil from the appellant stating that the Administrative Committee No. 1 had considered the findings given ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »