Chennai Court July 1997 Judgments
Valliammai Society, Represented by Its Chairman, T.R. Pachamuthu Vs. t ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-08-1997
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ506
ORDERK. Govindarajan, J.1. With the consent of both the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for final hearing.2. The petitioner is an educational society and is running several educational institutions. The Government in G.O.Ms.939 (Health & Family Welfare Department) dated 28.6.1993, G.O.Ms. 993 (Health & Family Welfare Department) dated 4.9.1992, G.O.Ms. 995 (Health & Family Welfare Department), dated 4.9.1993 and in G.O.Ms. No. 941 (Health & Family Welfare (ME II) Department) dated 28.6.1993, accorded sanction to the petitioner to start Bachelor of Physiotherapy course, B. Pharmacy Degree Course, B.Sc. Nursing course and Bachelor of Occupational Therapy Course respectively with an annual intake of 50 candidates in each course.3. The Government stipulated some conditions to obtain permission of the Government with respect to paramedical course. Clause 14 of the guidelines reads as follows:The college should have its own arrangement or tie up with major private medical institu...
Tag this Judgment!V.B. Jaganathan Vs. A.R. Srividhya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-08-1997
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ366
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. Husband in H.M.O.P. No. 80 of 1994, on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Trichy, is the revision petitioner herein. The marital relationship between petitioner and respondent has been terminated by a decree of divorce, and the same has become final. Pending the petition for divorce, respondent filed I.A. No. 256 of 1996 for return of certain articles which she claimed as her own and she prayed before the court below that necessary direction be given to the husband to return the same. In the affidavit filed by her in support of the application, she said that she was given 25 sovereigns of gold and cash of Rs. 10,000 and other household articles and the same were entrusted to her husband, which were given to her as 'Sridhana'. He was given 16 grams of gold chain on the eve of first Deepavali. She wanted return of all these things and also the cash.2. Petitioner herein denied the above allegation and he also contested the jurisdiction of the court to pas...
Tag this Judgment!Jewel Complex, a Registered Partnership Firm, Represented by Its Manag ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-08-1997
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ477
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. Both these revisions are against the same judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Coimbatore. C.R.P. No. 3299 of 1991 is filed under Section 25 of the Rent Control Act, and the other Revision, namely, C.R.P. No. 489 of 1992 is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The material facts may be summarised as follows:Revision petitioner is the landlord of the building. There was an earlier proceeding between the same parties for immediate demolition and reconstruction of the building which was then in existence. Even at the time when the present respondent was a tenant of the then building, he was occupying an area of 736 sq. ft. eviction petition filed by the revision petitioner was allowed, and the respondent herein filed a Rent Control Appeal before the appellate authority. The appellate authority also confirmed the order, and a revision taken to this Court also met with the same fate. Later, the respondent herein filed a Special Leave...
Tag this Judgment!Tube Products Employees Union Vs. Management of Tube Products of India ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-07-1997
Reported in: (1999)ILLJ949Mad
1. The above writ appeal has been filed against the order of a learned single Judge of this Court, dated August 7, 1992, in W.P. No. 14593 of 1990, whereunder the learned single Judge, while allowing the writ petition filed by the first respondent management, quashed the interim award passed by the second respondent-Labour Court, dated March 30, 1990, in I.D. No. 12 of 1981. 2 . The second respondent in the writ petition, whose cause is now espoused in this writ appeal by the Tube Products Employees' Union represented by its Secretary, was an employee of the first respondent - management come February 11, 1964. On receipt of as complaint against the said employee from one M.R. M. Sivalingam, Senior Engineer (Tool Room), to the effect that he misbehaved with him on November 5, 1977, at about 12 noon, the employee was said to have been placed under suspension on November 7, 1977, and a charge memo was also said to have been issued. A domestic enquiry was said to have been conducted after...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Andal Poly Industry Vs. the Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Cor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-07-1997
Reported in: 1997(2)CTC153
ORDERAR. Lakshmanan, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 17.3.1997 in W.P. No. 3679 of 1997 passed by Jayasimha Babu, J., dismissing the writ petition filed by the writ appellant challenging the proceedings initiated by the respondent/ Corporation Under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act.2. The appellant applied to the respondent/Corporation for a term loan of Rs. 13.5 lakhs for construction of the building and purchase of machinery and setting up a factory for manufacture of HDPE woven sacks, which was sanctioned on 5.3.1985. The petitioner firm executed a registered mortgage hypothecation and other connected documents on 16.5.1985 and also created an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds in favour of the respondent mortgaging the land and premises in Pudupatti Village bearing S.F. No. 672 and all the machineries etc., and promising to repay the amount with interest at 14.5% p.a. The appellant had also agreed to pay an additional interest of 2% p...
Tag this Judgment!Nicco Corporation Ltd. Vs. Cethar Vessels Ltd. and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-04-1997
Reported in: [1998]92CompCas748(Mad)
S.S. Subramani, J.1. This revision is by the first defendant in O.S. No. 376 of 1996, on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli. In this revision, the petitioner has sought for setting aside the ex parte decree of permanent injunction passed on August 5, 1996, by the Subordinate Judge, Tiruchy, and to permit the petitioner to invoke and enforce the B' bank guarantees referred to therein and also to recover costs. 2. In the grounds of revision, it is said that the first respondent herein entered into an agreement with the revision petitioner for manufacturing and supply of waste heat recovery boiler for a twin hearth furnace. These furnaces were meant for Durgapur Steel Plant. The petitioner had given an advance of Rs. 29 lakhs to the first respondent herein for part execution of the contract, and in order to guarantee the execution of the work, the second respondent-Canara Bank stood as guarantor for the first respondent. As per the terms of the guarantee, the petitioner wa...
Tag this Judgment!D.P. Anand Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-04-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ724; (1997)IIMLJ413
ORDER1. W.M.P. No. 8669 of 1997 is for an interim direction directing the second respondent to issue a temporary licence to the petitioner to hold the cultural dances at the petitioner's Pals restaurant at Premises No. 42, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002, pending disposal of the writ petition. 2. The prayer in the writ petition is to call for the records of the second respondent ending with his order bearing Rc. No. E3(1)/1284/177617/96, dated 27-3-1997 and direct the respondents to renew the licence for holding the Indian cultural dances at No. 42, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. On the basis of the application dated 9-12-1996, for the period from 1-1-1997 to 31-12-1997. 3. When the Writ Miscellaneous petition was taken up, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the arguments to be advanced in the Writ Miscellaneous Petition will hold good for the writ petition as well and the prayer in both of them are almost similar and requested that the Writ Miscellaneous P...
Tag this Judgment!M.N. Rajaraman Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-04-1997
Reported in: (1997)2MLJ381
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. In all these revisions, a common question arises for consideration.2. The properties of the various revision petitioners were acquired. Compensation amount as adjudicated by the court has been deposited. The sufficiency of the deposit was the matter in issue. One of the important reasons to contend that the deposit is insufficient, is the manner of appropriation. According to learned Counsel for revision petitioner, once the deposit is made, it is a decree debt and, therefore, first it will have to be appropriated towards interest, costs, and the balance amount will be adjusted towards principal. Thereafter, on the balance principal, they are entitled to get interest.3. The above argument of the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner was not accepted by the executing court and it was declared that the amount deposited was sufficient. Certain other contentions were also taken. But they were not pursued by the learned Counsel.4. I do not think, the learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Sivagamasundari Vs. Sundaram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1723; I(1999)DMC275
ORDER1. Petitioner who has failed in both the courts below in claiming maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure from the respondent, has filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before this Court to set aside the order passed in Criminal Revision Petition No. 80 of 1993 on the file of Sessions Judge, Cuddalore. 2. This petition arose in this way. Petitioner filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, before the Judicial Magistrate No. II, Chidambaram, in N.C. No. 1/92, claiming maintenance of Rs. 500/- per month. The averments made in the said petition are that the petitioner is the wife of the respondent, who is working as Engineer in Public Works Department, earning Rs. 5000/- per month. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent took place in 1968 as Bhuvanagiri, that the respondent was given Rs. 20,000/- and 15 sovereigns of jewels as dowry. After the marriage, they lived together for some t...
Tag this Judgment!Asmath Begum Vs. the Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity B ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-1997
Reported in: 1997(3)CTC527
ORDERRaju, J.1. The above second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Salem, dated 7.1.1983 in A.S. No. 129 of 1982, whereunder, the First/Appellate Judge has chosen to set aside and reverse the judgment and decree of the learned trial Judge and dismissed the suit.2. The suit O.S.No.225 of 1981 was filed by the respondent-plaintiff on the file of the District Munsif Court, Mettur, for declaring that the claim of Rs. 14,536.20 said to be the penal charges on the excess over quote consumption for service connection 702 of Omalur, which stands in the name of the plaintiff and included in the electric bill for the month of July, 1980 is illegal, arbitrary and unenforceable in law and for a permanent injunction restraining them from disconnecting the service connection for the non-payment of the alleged sum of Rs. 14,536.20. The service connection in question pertains to a cinema theatre at Omalur and there can be no dispute that at the releva...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »