Chennai Court January 1997 Judgments
Century Chemicals and Oils Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Esther Maragatham and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1999ACJ1191; 1997(2)CTC166
1. When the above C.M.Ps. came up for hearing, by consent of learned counsel on both the sides, the appeal itself was heard for final disposal. The second respondent, on the file of Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Madurai, is the appellant before this Court. The applicants before the Labour Court are claiming under one Kumar, who was a workman employed by one Pushparaj, third respondent before this Court. It is their case that he died on September 29, 1988, in an accident which arose in the course of employment. It is said that on that date, the second respondent/appellant engaged the deceased, Kumar, through the contractor, Pushparaj, for the purpose of doing boiler work under the direct control of the appellant, and, while the deceased was working in electrical drilling work within the premises of the appellant, due to negligent and improper arrangement of the electrical drilling machine, it broke and Kumar died on the spot as a result of electrocution. The accident took place in the ...
Tag this Judgment!The Assistant Director of Horticulture Division, Anna Pannai, and Anot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1998ACJ48; (1997)IILLJ568Mad; (1997)IMLJ613
ORDER1. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in W.C. No. 21 of 1994, on the file of Deputy Commissioner of Labour-cum-Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Tiruchirapalli, are the appellants before this Court. 2. First respondent herein was the petitioner before the Authority. According to him, his daughter Alagu Meenal was employed by the first respondent Contractor (Second respondent herein) when he undertook the work through Third respondent, for digging a well, and, while she was working, suddenly she met with an accident due to the fall of a stone on her head, which further caused her to fall into the deep well. Even though her body was lifted by the other workers and she was rushed to hospital, she was pronounced dead. It is alleged that Alagu Meenal died while she met with the accident arising out of and in the course of employment under Respondents Nos. 1 to 3. It is further said that the well for the farm of second respondent was being dug by third respondent. It is also said that Alag...
Tag this Judgment!T.S. Krishnamoorth Vs. Mercury Chemicals Rep. by Its Partner N. Visvan ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997(1)CTC507
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. The prayer in the writ petition reads as follows:-'To issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, prohibiting the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Madras, the second respondent herein from proceeding with O.P.No. 1223of 1993 of the first respondent herein.'2. The case of the petitioner as seen from the affidavit filed in support of the above writ petition is briefly stated hereunder:- The petitioner is one of the senior members of the Tiruppattur Bar. According to him, the first respondent herein has preferred a complaint in O.P.No. 1223 of 1993 before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Madras, the second respondent herein, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection act, 1986, read with Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu Consumer Protection Rules, 1988 against the petitioner claiming Rs. 4,375-75 and Rs. 21,612-35 on the alleged ground that he failed and neglected to discharge his professional duties in filing a suit...
Tag this Judgment!indira Cotton Mills (P) Limited, Represented by Its Managing Director, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)CTC415
ORDERJayarama Chouta, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order to call for the records relating to C.No. 1241-11 (53 of 1985) on the file of the first respondent and quash the impunged order dated 21.8.1987 and consequently direct the first respondent to grant the relief of waiver of interest to the petitioner for the said assessment year.2. The petitioner is the private limited company represented by its Managing Director. The petitioner is an assessee of the Income Tax Act on the file of the Income Tax Officer in G.I. No. 10-1. For the assessment Year 1981-82, the petitioner filed a statement of account in Form No. 28A on 11.6.1980 on an income of Rs. 19,80,690 based on the assessment completed for 1977-78 and paid the first two instalment tax at the rate of Rs. 4,25,848, per installment. On 15.12.1980 a revised estimate in Form No. 29 dated 10.12.1980 was filed estimating th...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Agencies and anr. Vs. O.R. Abdul Rahim and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ149
ORDERT.N. Vallinayagam, J.1. C.M.P. No. 481 of 1997 is filed for excusing the delay of 630 days in filing the application to bring on record the legal representatives of the respondent. C.M.P. No. 482 of 1997 is filed to set aside the abatement, arising due to the death of the respondent and C.M.P. No. 483 of 1997 is filed to bring on record the proposed party as legal representative of the deceased respondent.2. C.M.P. No. 481 of 1997 is seriously opposed and a counter has been filed by the wife of the deceased landlord.3. It is curious and important to note that she herself has filed an application in I.A. No. 14 of 1994 in R.C.O.P. No. 27 of 1987 to implead her as the legal representative of her deceased husband and that petition was ordered on 9.12.1994 by the District Munsif, Thanjavur. When she was aware of the fact that her husband died and when she herself has filed an application to bring her on record as the legal representative, it is not proper for her to contend before thi...
Tag this Judgment!Express Newspapers Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-31-1997
Reported in: (1997)59TTJ(Mad)516
ORDERC. L. BOKOLIA, A.M. :This appeal is preferred against the order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee in this appeal has taken various grounds which are being discussed and decided on merits.Loss from Potato Division2. The first ground of appeal relates to non-allowance of loss suffered by the assessee from potato business, amounting to Rs. 74,65,319. The details of this ground of appeal is discussed in detail at pp. 5 to 32 of the assessment order. The assessee has preferred appeal against this ground of appeal and the statement of facts are reproduced at pp. 15 to 22 of the statement of facts before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) has decided this ground of appeal in his order, discussing the details at paras 22 to 54 at pp. 24 to 52.3. On the basis of discussions with one Shri Gopal Agarwal of Calcutta who happens to be the Director of Navin Cold Storage (P) Ltd. and Nirmal & Navin (P) Ltd., handling the business of sale and purchase of potatoes depicted a rosy picture, an understanding...
Tag this Judgment!Appadurai Vs. State by Inspector of Police Chatrapatty Police Station, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-30-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2349
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. The appellant - Appadurai is the accused in SC No. 1 of 1987 on the file of the Sessions Court, Anna District at Dindigul. He was tried and convicted for the offence under S. 302, IPC, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The gravamen of the charges is that on 23-7-1986 at about 5-30 p.m., when the deceased Palanisami was standing on the west of Mottaya Boyan's manure pit the appellant came there and questioned Palanisami as to how could he have intimacy with Rajamani, P.W. 4 who has been kept by him and so saying stabbed Palanisami with a knife below his left lung and as a result of which Palanisami fell down and died on the spot. 3. The facts that could be discerned from the materials placed before the Court could summarised as follows : (a) P.W. 1 Murugesa Gounder is the father of the deceased Palanisami. He is living in Kanakkanpatti. His son Palanisami, the deceased, married one Palaniammal and the said Palaniammal died three months after th...
Tag this Judgment!Arjunan and Etc. Vs. State by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-30-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2327; 1997(1)CTC524
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. These three appeals are heard together and common Judgment is rendered since it relates to a single case. 2. The appellants are the accused in S.C. No. 97 of 1986, on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Periyar District at Erode. The appellant Arjunan was convicted under section 302 I.P.C., and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The appellant Lakshmi Ammal alias Lakshmi was convicted under section 323 I.P.C., and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- in default to undergo R.I. for one month. The appellant Kuppusamy Gounder was convicted under section 325 I.P.C., and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years. 3. The crux of the accusation is that on 11-5-1986 at about 3.30 p.m., at Voikkalmedu, Poolaavalasu village A-1 Kuppusamy Gounder, the father pelted stone at P.W. 2 Chinnammal and caused grievous hurt. A-2 Lakshmi Ammal, mother pelted stone at P.W. 2 and caused simple hurt, and A-3 Arjunan, son, by means of wooden reaper attacked on the head of the...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-30-1997
Reported in: [1997]226ITR919(Mad)
K.A. Thanikkachalam J.1. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to section 36(1)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the reassessment made under section 147(b) of the Act for the assessment year 1972-73 was properly cancelled ?' 2. The assessee is a company in which the public are not substantially interested. The assessment for the assessment year 1972-73 was originally completed on November 21, 1974. Subsequently the audit party pointed out that in the original assessment, the depreciation on roads was wrongly allowed and that 80 per cent. of the initial contribution of Rs. 46,950 to the superannuation fund was wrongly deducted under section 36(1)(iv) of the Act in computing the income of the assessee. The Income-tax Officer, therefore, reopened the as...
Tag this Judgment!M.S.D. thenraja Vs. Executive Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-30-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)CTC507
ORDERC. Shivappa, J.1. The petitioners have challenged the rejection of their nomination papers to the election scheduled for Cantonment Board on 2.2.1997. The grievance being common, the contesting respondents have filed common counters and hence all these petitions were heard together and decided by this common order.2. Few dates and certain important facts are summarised hereunder.3. The date of election to Cantonment Board was proclaimed on 17.12.1996 and the schedule for election was also given. The last date for inclusion of names in Electoral Roll was fixed on 20.12.1996. On the same day effected publication of list of claims with notice inviting objections to such applications. The last date for receipt of objections to claim applications was fixed on 23.12.1996. Disposal of the claims and objections by the President was fixed on 24 and 25th December, 1996 between 9 A.M. and 5 P.M. The presentation of nomination papers for the election to the Returning Officer was fixed on 26.1...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »