Chennai Court April 1997 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.
Ttk Textiles Ltd. Vs. Seagull Clothing (Pvt.) Ltd. and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)CTC55
ORDERShivaraj Patil, J.1. The plaintiff in C.S.No. 6 of 1997 has filed these appeals aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 18.2.1997 passed by the learned single Judge dismissing O.A.Nos. 7, 8 and 9 of 1997 and allowing application Nos. 284 to 289 of 1997. The parties will be referred to in this Judgment as they are arrayed in C.S.No. 6 of 1997 for convenience.2. The facts briefly stated, for the purpose of disposal of these appeals, are the following:-The plaintiff has filed the said suit C.S.No. 6 of 1997 seeking the relief of -(a) Permanent injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, their directors, servants, agents, heirs, legal representatives, assigns, distributors, stockists, representatives or any of them from in any manner infringing the plaintiff's copyright in artistic work 'SEAGULL' by use of an identical artistic work SEAGULL or any other artistic work which is a substantial reproduction of plaintiff's artistic work SEAGULL or in any other manner whatsoever;(...
K. Leela Kumar and anr. Vs. the Government of India, Ministry of Law a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1997
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ360
AR. Lakshmanan, J.1. The above writ appeals are directed against the common order of T. Somasundaram, J., dated 30.7.1991 in W.P. Nos. 667 and 769 of 1989, dismissing both the writ petitions filed by the appellants holding that Circular No. 32 of 1975 dated 1.11.1975 issued by the 1st respondent is not a statutory circular, that it is only an administrative instruction given at department level and that the appellants, who are third parties, cannot seek to enforce the same.2. The appellants are members of the 3rd respondent Club, which is a company registered under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Secretary of the 3rd respondent on 3.1.1989 issued a notice to the appellants stating that the appellants in their letter to the members had commented about the functioning of the Committee of the 3rd respondent, that the same was not conducive to the interest of the 3rd respondent and that therefore, the appellants should show cause why app...
Managing Director (Metro), Pallavan Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. Kal ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-07-1997
Reported in: 1998ACJ151
C.V. Govardhan, J.1. This appeal arises out of the order passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madras in M.C.O.P. No. 534 of 1983.2. The petitioners' case is as follows: On 28.11.1982 at about 2.30 p.m. at Tiruvallur High Road, Ambattur in front of the Dunlop Company the bus belonging to the respondent was driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver and it has dashed against the van coming from the opposite direction. In the accident the driver of the van succumbed to injuries. The petitioners are the dependants being the wife and children of the deceased. They make a claim for compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-.3. The respondents in their counter contend as follows: The accident was not due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus as alleged. After dropping the passengers at the Dunlop Bus Stop, the bus was taken and at that time the van driven by the deceased at a high speed dashed against a pedestrian and came in front of the bus and collided with the same. The accident...
Syed AmIn Khalandar Vs. the Director of Collegiate Education and Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)CTC87; (1997)IILLJ287Mad; (1997)IIMLJ547
ORDER1. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has prayed to issue appropriate Writs, Orders or Directions and in particular issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus after calling for the concerned records from the third respondent pertaining to their proceedings in reference No. D. 1831/C/88 and quash the order dated June 6, 1988 and consequently direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner till May 31. 1989. 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the above writ petition are as follows : The petitioner who was working in the third respondent college as 'Librarian' has reached the age of superannuation on June 9, 1988. The post of 'Librarian' is categorised as 'Teacher' under Section 2(10) of the Tamilnadu Private College (Regulations) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Under Section 17 of the said Act, the Government is empowered to prescribe the service condition of the teachers employed in private colleges and that includes fix...
Reichold Chemicals India Ltd., Madras Vs. Workmen, Reichold Chemicals ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: (1997)IILLJ1008Mad
1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed to issue a writ of cerlioraii and call for the records connected with I.D. No. 401 of 1984 on the file of the second respondent and quash the award, dated March 9, 1988, passed in the above case. 2. Necessary facts for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition could be gathered from the affidavit of one P. Subrainoni, calling himself as the Deputy General Manager and Secretary of the Petitioner. The petitioner is the company registered under the Companies Act and has its falctory at Madhavaram, wherein it has been engaged in the manufacture of chemicals by engaging 51 workmen. Depending upon the exigencies of work the company used to engage the services of casual labourers. The Standing Orders of the company itself recognises the category of casual employees. Three, workers, namely' A. G. Murali, A. Sulthan and G. L. N. Prasad were employed as casual workmen for the post of watchmen according to the exigencies then prevailed. When...
M. Rahimkan Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Commissioner for Workme ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)CTC558
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. The petitioner who has already suffered by an order in W.C.Case No. 112 of 1993 on the file of Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition seeking a writ of declaration declaring the third proviso to Section 30(1) of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently seeks direction to set aside the order in W.C.Case No. 112 of 1993 dated 11.12.1996.2. The case of the petitioner as seen from the affidavit filed by the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder:-According to the petitioner, he is a Diploma Holder in Electrical Engineering and running a small Electrical Works shop doing rewinding of electrical motors and repairing of electrical appliances and job works. After starting of the factory, the second respondent management started giving job works to him for motor rewinding. The second respondent engaged some persons including the deceased S...
E. Devarani and ors. Vs. Santhana Kumar Nadar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: (1997)1MLJ651
ORDERS.M. Abdul Wahab, J.1. C.R.P. No. 2839 of 1996 is against the order dated 13.9.1996 in M.P. No. 357 of 1994 in R.C.A. No. 240 of 1994 on the file of the VII Judge, Small Causes Court, Madras.2. C.R.P. No. 246 of 1997 is against the order dated 7.11.1996 in R.C.A. No. 1134 of 1996 on the file of the VII Judge, Small Causes Court, Madras.3. C.M.P. No. 1171 of 1997 in C.R.P.S.R. No. 450 of 1997 is to grant leave to the petitioners to prefer a revision petition against the order dated 7.11.1996 in R.C.A. No. 240 of 1992 on the file of the VII Judge, Small Causes Court, Madras.4. In all the three cases, Mrs. E. Devarani and others are the petitioners. According to them, their father G. Ethirajulu filed R.C.O.P. No. 2630 of 1989 for eviction of a tenant by name Santhana Kumar Nadar under Section 10(2)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. On 6.12.1991 an order of eviction was passed in the said petition by the 15th Judge, Small Causes Court, Madras. Against ...
Vellaiyan Vs. Nookkammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)CTC157
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. Defendant in O.S.No.797 of 1980, on the file of District Munsif's Court, Tirunelveli, is the appellant.2. Suit filed by the respondent was one for recovery of property on the following allegations:-The property belonged to one Chellam Iyer and others, under whom the appellant was admittedly a tenant. While he was enjoying the property as a lessee, he entered into an agreement for sale, agreeing to purchase the property for Rs. 8,750 and also paid an advance of Rs. 101. A term of nine months was provided for completion of the contract. But the sale could not materialise. Thereafter, the plaintiff purchased the property. It is the case of the plaintiff that when the defendant entered into an agreement for sale, his tenancy right also came to an end and the same could not revive after the agreement had lapsed. Possession of the defendant, therefore, is not lawful, or at any rate, not as a tenant. Plaintiff, on the basis of his title, is entitled to recover the pr...
Vel Murugan theatre, Represented by Its Partner S. Ramaswamy Vs. State ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-1997
Reported in: (1998)1MLJ23
ORDERJayarama Chouta, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records comprised in the proceedings of the 1st respondent In G.O. Rt. No. 1857, Home (Cinemas-I) Department, dated 20.5.1986, confirming the proceedings of the 3rd respondent made in D. Dis. L.C.A. No. 130 of 1987, dated 20.5.1987 and that of the third respondent in his proceedings made in Roc. C2/160545/86, dated 9.5.1987 and quash the same.2. The necessary facts for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition can be gathered from the affidavit of one S. Ramaswamy, who is one of the partner of the petitioner's theatre. The petitioner theatre is a permanent theatre situated in Athur Town, which had been exhibiting four shows per day and had been paying entertainment tax, under Section 5(b) of the Entertainment Tax Act. On 14.1.1986, the petitioner made an application to the Licensing Authority i.e., the Collector of Salem requesting permission to run 5 sh...
Yoosuf Rawther Vs. Ashref and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALT(Cri)298
ORDER1. This case relates to a sorry state of affairs, wherein a Muslim minor son, who was left in lurch by both his father and mother, has been fighting with his father for the past 13 years, claiming arrears of maintenance due to him, in pursuance of the order passed in his favour in the maintenance proceedings in M.C. No. 27 of 1984, on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District, without getting a pie from him, till date. 2. The father is the petitioner herein. The minor son is the respondent. On 12-11-1984, one Nabeesa, the divorced wife of the petitioner herein, the mother of the minor son, respondent herein, filed a petition under S. 125, Cr. P.C., in M.C. No. 27 of 1984, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District, claiming maintenance for herself and for her minor son who was aged 4 years then. After evidence was taken, by order dated 24-2-1986, the learned Magistrate directed the petitioner to pay a ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »