Chennai Court July 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.
Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited Represented by Its Secretary Vs. t ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-02-1996
Reported in: (1997)1MLJ164
ORDERS.M. Abdul Wahab, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited represented by its Secretary against the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner.2. The prayer in the writ petition is for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order dated 27.5.1987 and to issue direction to the first respondent and direct the first respondent to enforce the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund Act and the allied scheme against the second respondent.3. The case of the petitioner is that the Neyveli Lignite Corporation owns a guest house and it was leased out to the second respondent with effect from 1.10.1983. The second respondent recruited their own personnel through agencies viz., the Self Employment Council to fill up the various posts in the Guest House. All the employees employed in the Guest House were recruited and are under the control and supervision of the second respondent. The petitioner ' has no connection or authority over the manner and ...
S. Thangaswamy Vs. R. Vinayakamurthy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-1996
Reported in: 1996(2)CTC105; (1996)IIMLJ322
ORDERAR. Lakshmanan, J.1. The tenant has filed the above civil revision petition against the concurrent findings of both the authorities below, ordering eviction of the petitioner on the question of denial of title and also for demolition and re-construction of the property in question.2. The respondent herein filed R.C.O.P. No. 9 of 1986 under Section 14(1)(b) and under Section 10(2)(vii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The plea of the landlord was that the building was required for demolition and re-construction. The petition was resisted by the tenant contending that the petition was lacking in bona fides. The Rent Controller on consideration of law and facts ordered eviction. Aggrieved against the same, the tenant preferred R.C.A. No. 6 of 1989 and the same was dismissed on 20.2.1991 granting a month's time. Aggrieved by the orders of the appellate authority confirming the orders of the Rent Controller, the petitioner...
Abdul Hameed Vs. M. Sultan Abdul Kader
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-1996
Reported in: (1996)2MLJ579
ORDERAR. Lakshmanan, J.1. Respondent was served through Court. There is no representation on his behalf. Heard Mr. K. Chandrasekaran, learned Counsel for the petitioner - tenant.2. This revision petition has been filed against the order in R.C.A.No. 1 of 1990 dated 9.4.1991 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Tribunal (Sub Court), Nagapattinam, reversing the order passed in R.C.O.P.No. 14 of 1986 dated 31.10.1989, on the file of the Rent Controller (District Munsif), Nagapattinam.3. Respondent filed R.C.O.P.No. 14 of 1986 on the only ground of wilful default in the payment of rent. The petitioner herein is the tenant of a non-residential premises let out to him on a monthly rent of Rs. 50. The landlord - respondent herein alleged that the petitioner has committed wilful default in the payment of rent from January, 1985 to December, 1985, to the tune of Rs. 600 for 12 months. The petitioner - tenant contested the petition on the ground that the landlord used to collect the rent th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›