Chennai Court February 1999 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.
Raman C.V. Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-1999
Reported in: (2001)IIILLJ128Mad; (1999)IMLJ708
Ms. T. Meenakumari, J. 1. The writ petition is for the issue of writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records from the file of the first respondent vide proceedings in reference No. Nil, dated March 19, 1990 confirming the order of the second respondent vide proceedings in reference No. Nil, dated February 22, 1989 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service, with back wages and continuity of service.2. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has joined as clerk in the first respondent bank on February 15. 1962. He was promoted as Headclerk in the year 1971 and subsequently in the year 1972 he was promoted as Officer Grade-II. In the year 1976 he was promoted as Officer Grade I and subsequently he has been promoted in the Middle Management Grade II in the year 1984. Till February 1985 he was posted as a Branch Manager in the Thanichayam Branch (Madurai District). While he was working as the Branch...
Rajangam Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3914
T. Jayarama Chouta, J.1. The appellant Rajangam who has been tried for an offence of murder of one Natarajan by the Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam in Sessions Case No. 41 of 1987 and who has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life by judgment dated 17-11-1987 has filed this appeal challenging the said conviction and sentence.2. The prosecution case in brief for the purpose of disposal of the criminal appeal is as follows: The accused Rajangam and the deceased Natarajan were residents of Sivaramapuram in Mayiladuthurai within Kuttalam Police Station jurisdiction. The accused was a resident of Tanjore and he came and settled down in the said village since ten years. One Dhindan had leasehold right of fishing and he had not submitted the report relating to that properly and hence, there was a case against him for defalcation. A Panchayat was held in which the Panchayatdhars decided that the said Dhindan should be excommunicated and the Villagers should not help him in ...
K. Lakshmi and ors. Vs. V. Ganesan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-1999
Reported in: (1999)2MLJ162
K. Gnanaprakasam, J.1. The respondent/defendants have filed the civil miscellaneous appeal against the order dated 30.4.1998 passed by the City Civil Court (III Additional Judge) Chennai in I.A.No. 5093 of 1997 in O.S.No. 1682 of 1997.2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they were arrayed in the original suit.3. The plaintiffs filed the suit for partition and allotment of one fourth share in both the items of the suit properties. The contention of the plaintiff in the suit is that both the items of properties are ancestral joint family properties consisting of his father Late Velaytham Pillai and the plaintiff and the defendants herein. Velaytham Pillai died on 30.8.1996 and his wife Alamelu Animal pre-deceased him. The plaintiffs and the defendants 2 and 3 are residing in different portion in the first item of the property and the first defendant viz., Lakshmi is residing in a portion in the second item of the property. After funeral ceremonies of late...
Venkateswaran Vs. the Director of School Education and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-1999
Reported in: (1999)3MLJ94
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J.1. Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 4th respondent made in proceedings in Ref. Nil, dated 18.2.1993 and to quash the same and consequently to forbear the 4th respondent from retiring the petitioner before reaching the age of 60 years.2. Admittedly, the petitioner was working in the 4th respondent School, which is governed by the Code of Regulations of Matriculations Schools (hereinafter referred to as the Code). Clause 18(1) of Chapter Vi of the Code reads as follows:(18(1) The members of the staff including the principal will retire at the age of 60 (sixty) as permitted by the University. If they have to retire in the middle of the academic year, they will continue to be re-employed till the close of the academic year, i.e., 31st May. The Director is empowered to give extension for a period of two years only. One year at a time in respect of Principals of Matriculation Schools who atta...
N.M. Palanimuthu Vs. the Commissioner Hr and Ce (Admn.) Dept. and Five ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)CTC534
ORDERThe revision petitioner is the plaintiff in the un-numbered plaint in O.S. on the file of the Sub-Court, Salem and the petitioner in I.A.No. 471 of 1994 in that un-numbered suit. The respondents are the defendants in the said un-numbered suit and the respondents in that application. That un-numbered suit was filed under section 70 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 1959 as amended by Act 39 of 1996, hereinafter referred to as the Endowments Act, against the order of the Commissioner of HR & CE, Madras passed under section 69 of the Endowments Act. Under Section 70(1)(ii) of the Endowments Act, the time prescribed for filing the suit is fixed as within 90 days from the date of the receipt of such order. On the date when the suit was filed before the Sub-Court, Salem since the 90 days period had expired, an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act bearing I.A.No.471 of 1994 came to be filed with a request to condone the delay of 131 days in fili...
S.P. Natarajan and Etc. Vs. Chief Engineer, Highways and Rural Works D ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Mad458
N.K. Jain, Ag. C.J.1. These two writ appeals have been filed by the appellants against the common order of the learned single Judge dated 14-10-1998 dismissing the Writ Petitions.2. The grievance of the petitioners is that theyare registered class I contractors of Highways and Rural Works Department The pre-qualification conditions prescribed by the respondents for participating in the bid in respect of west coast road tender, viz., widening and strengthening the existing carriage way of west Coast Road to two lane including C.D. works from Kanyakumari District to Pazhaya Utchakadai are intended only to eliminate other contractors and grant the contract to their own party men and it is arbitrary.3. The learned single Judge on consideration, held that the said pre-qualifications have been introduced only in terms of Government Order in Ms. H.C No. 2086 dated 25-10-1989. Under the said Government order, where there is any work costing more than a crore of rupees, there should be a condit...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Orient Pharma (P.) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-1999
Reported in: [2000]241ITR259(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1. The admitted tacts are that the assessee made a provision of Rs. 84,849 during the assessee's financial year which ended on May 31, 1975, towards the liability for payment of gratuity to its employees. The amount was not disbursed to the employees towards the gratuity that was payable during that year. The assessee set up a gratuity fund by trust deed dated December 28, 1975, after the closure of the financial year and secured the approval of the Commissioner of Income-tax for the trust on July 25, 1977. The Income-tax Officer allowed the deduction that was claimed by the assessee with regard to the said sum. The Commissioner of Income-tax on a suo motu revision held that such a deduction was impermissible having regard to Section 40A(7)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which had been inserted by the Finance Act, 1975, with effect from April 1, 1973. The Tribunal while disagreeing with the Commissioner's view has restored the order of the Income-tax Officer.2. C...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jayaraj Talkies
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-1999
Reported in: [1999]239ITR914(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The Tribunal has given reasons for holding that the penalty is not leviable on the assessee. The reasons given are that there was a dispute between the lessee and the lessor of the theatre which has resulted in the proceedings in court, that the statement relied on by the Income-tax Officer was not a statement obtained from the lessee in the presence of the lessor ; that the lessor had not been given an opportunity to cross-examine the lessee ; and that the repair work to the furniture had been carried out by the workers of one Madhava Rao and Sons, Secunderabad, at a time when those workers had spare time on account of insufficient work being available at that time.2. The Revenue contends that as the assessee-owner of the theatre who had derived income from leasing the same, had after filing a return claiming deduction of a sum of Rs. 4,125 and Rs. 16,348 towards building maintenance and furniture repairs respectively, himself volunteered to offer these sums as...
Employees' State Insurance Corporation and Anr. Vs. North Arcot Distri ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-1999
Reported in: [2000(85)FLR294]; (2000)IILLJ237Mad
K. Gnanaprakasam, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation as against the order dated November 27, 1989, passed by the Employees' State Insurance Court, Vellore, in E.S.I.O.P. No. 5 of 1988.2. The first respondent herein, namely, North Arcot District Consumers Wholesale Society Ltd. was registered under Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act and the employees of the said society are covered under the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act and they have been paying the contribution for those employees. The appellant by its notice dated July 23, 1987, called upon the respondents to pay contribution in respect of wages paid to the workers who are employed for 'cleaning commodities' and also for wages paid to the workers who are 'loading and unloading' the goods. As the respondent has not come forward to pay the contribution as demanded, the appellant passed an order under Section 45A of the Employees' State Insurance Act. As against the same, the...
R. Nandakumar Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited Represented ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-1999
Reported in: (1999)2MLJ536
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the 1st respondent dated 27.5.1997 suspending the petitioner from service pending criminal offence under investigation, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition to quash the said order on various grounds.2. The case of the petitioner is briefly stated here-under:According to him he belongs to Konda Reddis community, which is one of the communities listed as a Scheduled Tribe under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950 passed by the President. The respondents-Corporation is an undertaking controlled by the Government of India. The petitioner was appointed for the post of Assistant Grade-III under the quota reserved for Schedule Tribes on 19.4.1982. At the time of appointment he produced a community certificate dated 17.5.1979 issued by the Headquarters Tahsildar, Saidapet. After completion of one year his services were confirmed. In 1987 he was promoted as Assistant Grade-II and in 1993 he was again promoted as Assistan...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »