Chennai Court April 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.
M. Sona Rajan (Minor) Rep. by Father and Natural Guardian Mohanarajan ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)CTC1; (1999)IIMLJ363
ORDERJudgment Pronounced by N.K. Jain, A.C.J.1. All these appeals involve the same question of fact and law. As agreed, they are being heard together.2. In the Writ Appeal No: 1082 of 1992 a Division Bench of this Court considered the question of the implication of reservation of certain seats for children of inter-caste marriages with preference to children born to spouses to whom one is a member of a Schedule Caste or a Schedule Tribe.3. While considering the view taken by a Division Bench of this Court in Hari Ganesh's case, : AIR1987Mad55 , the Division Bench thought that another view also would be possible taking into view the following points:I. When a child born of a forward and the schedule caste spouse ordinarily will take the interior caste (See Maine's Hindu Law) and thus shall be entitled to the reservation for the class under which the Schedule Caste belongs. Will then the reservation of seat for the reason of such a child born to a spouse of whom one or the other member i...
Hemavathiammal and Another Vs. Valliammal and 2 Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)CTC487; (1999)3MLJ110
ORDER1. 1st petitioner is the tenant. Having suffered by the orders of eviction by both the Authorities below, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the impugned orders. 2. The respondents filed an application for eviction in R.C.O.P.No. 8 of 1990 on the ground of wilful default, owner's occupation and sub-letting. The Rent Controller though rejected their prayer on the. ground of owner's occupation, ordered eviction on the other two grounds. The Appellate Authority, in the appeal filed by the tenant, the petitioner herein, though held that the tenant is not liable to be evicted on the ground of sub-letting, confirmed the eviction on the ground of wilful default. Now, the present revision by the tenant is as against the order of the Appellate Authority confirming the finding with reference to the wilful default. 3. Learned counsel for both sides were heard. On a perusal of the orders impugned and the grounds and other records and on consideration of the submiss...
Shanmuga Sadachara Servai Vs. Thirugnanam Servai and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1999
Reported in: (1999)2MLJ616
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. Shanmugha Sadachara Servai, the petitioner herein is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 31 of 1989 on the file of District Munsif, Kovilpatti. He filed the suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction. After trial, the said suit was dismissed. Though he instructed his lawyer to file an appeal after getting the copies of the judgment and decree, the copy application was not filed in time. Therefore, he engaged some other Lawyer to whom he instructed to file an appeal. In the process of filing the appeal, there was a delay of 94 days. Therefore, the petitioner filed an application in I.A. No. 530 of 1991 to condone the said delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The petitioner examined himself as P. W. 1 in the enquiry conducted on this application. The reasons for causing the delay of 94 days were given by P. W. 1 in the deposition. He was also cross-examined. After consideration of the materials and submissions of the counsel for both the parties, ...
M. Sona Rajan (Minor) Represented by Father and Natrual Guardian Mohan ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1999
Reported in: (1999)2MLJ363
N.K. Jain, Actg. C.J.1. All these appeals involve the same question of fact and law. As agreed, they are being heard together.2. In the Writ Appeal No. 1082 of 1992 a Division Bench of this Court considered the question of the implication of reservation of certain seats for children of inter-caste marriages with preference to children born to spouses to whom one is a member of schedule caste or a schedule tribe.3. While considering the view taken by a Division Bench of this Court in Hari Ganesh's case A.I.R. 1987 Mad. 55, the Division Bench thought that another view also would be possible taking into view the following points:I. When a child born of a forward and the schedule caste spouse ordinarily will take the inferior caste (See: Mayhen's Hindu Law) and thus shall be entitled to the reservation for the class under which the scheduled caste belongs. Will then the reservation of seat for the reason of such a child born to a spouse of whom one or the other member is a schedule caste o...
Borosil Glass Works Limited, Represented by Its Attorney Agent Vs. S.R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-1999
Reported in: (1999)3MLJ500
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. Borosil Glass Works Limited at No. 161, Second Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai-2. the petitioner herein is the tenant. Challenging the concurrent orders of eviction, the present revision has been filed before this Court.2. The respondent/landlord filed an application in R.C.O.P.No. 2889 of 1989 for eviction under Section 10(2)(1) for the Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on the ground of wilful default.3. During the pendency of the said application, the petitioner/tenant filed an application in R.C.O.P.No. 3311 of 1989 under Section 9(3) of the Act for deposit of rents into court. After a common enquiry in both these applications, a common order was passed by the Rent Controller upholding the claim of the landlord and dismissing the application filed by the tenant for deposit of rents into court.4. The tenant-the petitioner herein chose to file an appeal before the appellate authority only as against...
Chennai Small and Tiny Industries Association, Rep. by Its Secretary N ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)CTC304
ORDER1. The petitioner has filed the above writ petition, seeking to issue for declaration, declaring that the calling for the tenders from manufactures only for the supply of sewing machines for the implementation of the scheme of free supply of sewing machines during the year 1998-1999 in the impugned notification made by the 2nd respondent published in Indian Express dated 17.8.1998, as ultrawires, unconstitutional illegal and opposed to public policy.2. In the notification as published in the newspaper dated 17.8.1998, the director of social welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme, Chennai- 600 005 call for tenders from manufactures of sewing machines for the supply of 4000 nos. of Tailoring Model Pedaling Sewing Machines for the implementation of the scheme of free supply of sewing machines during the year 1998-1999. The members of the petitioner Association used to purchase the parts and assemblethe same as sewing machines only to eliminate the petitioner such a condition has been ...
M. Padmavathy, 11, 1st Floor, East Spurtank Road, Chennai-31 and Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)CTC323
ORDER1. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are the owners of the lands acquired by the respondents for the establishment of the industrial complex. They have filed these writ petitions, challenging the acquisition of their lands. Apart from the availability of the poramboke lands, the Government has decided to acquite an extent of 935.52.0 Hectares in Sriperumbudur 'C', Pondur 'A', Pondur 'C', Irungulam, Araneri, Mambakkam, Thirumangalam. Sirumangadu and Santhavellur villages of Sriperumbudur Taluk of Kancheepuram District to form an industrial complex in the area. The State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT) addressed the Government for administrative sanction for the establishment of an industrial complex in the above area and also to acquire the private lands by invoking the urgency clause under Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act I of 1984) (hereinafter called as 'the said Act') and also for the transfer of the poramboke lands....
Stanely Robert Vs. Assistant Collector (Customs) Customs and Airport C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1999
Reported in: 2000(3)CTC342; 2000(120)ELT329(Mad)
ORDER1. Stanely Robert is the appellant herein. He was convicted in S.C.No.187 of 1990 on the file of II Additional Session Judge, Trichy fro the offence under Section 8(c) read with Section 23 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, and Section 135(a) of Customs Act and sentenced to undergo, R.I. for 12 years and in addition to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000 in default to undergo R.I. one year.2. The grave men of charge against the appellant is that on 18.6.1990 atabout 3.45 p.m. at Customs Airport, Tiruchy he was found in possession of266 gms, of narcotic drugs valued at Rs.26,000 kept concealed in the shoesworn by him, in contravention of the provisions of an offence punishableunder Sections 8(c) and 23 of the N.D.P.S. Act and Section 135(a) of theCustoms Act.3. On behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 8 were examined and Exs.P1 to P11 were filed and M.Os.1 to 7 were marked. On the said of defence, Ex.D1was filed.4. The case of the prosecution is as follows:-On 18.6.90 Stanely ...
Sri Balasubramania Traders Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR49(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. The petitioner is a partnership firm constituted under a deed of partnership dated January 30, 1987, and the firm consisted of several persons including persons outside the family and when some difference of opinion arose, according to the petitioner, a memo of understanding was reached and under the said memo, the firm suspended its business on October 31, 1987, and handed over the movable assets and liabilities as per the schedule recorded in the books which were taken over by one Karthikeyan, son of Krishnan, one of the partners, on November 1, 1987. The said Karthikeyan was permitted to continue the trading business in the name and style of the petitioner firm.2. The writ petition relates to the assessment year 1990-91. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessing Officer) for the assessment year 1988-89 took the view that the memo of understanding entered into between the petitioner and the said Karthikeyan indicated that the business was not aban...
K.T. Kunjumon Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-19-1999
Reported in: [1999]239ITR782(Mad)
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. The writ petition in W. P. No. 1425 of 1999 is filed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-1, Chennai 34, dated November 18, 1998, and the prayer in the writ petition is to quash the said order and to direct the Commissioner of Income-tax to redeposit a sum of Rs. 24,25,810 in the P. D. Account of the respondent to the credit of the petitioner for the assessment year 1994-95.2. The writ petition in W. P. No. 1424 of 1999 is filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-1, Chennai 54, dated January 12, 1999 in C. No. Act No. 0022/KVSS/C.1, and the prayer in the writ petition is to quash the said order and to direct the Commissioner of Income-tax to admit and accept the declaration filed by the petitioner under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998.3. The result of W. P. No. 1424 of 1999 would depend upon the result of W. P. No. 1425 of 1999. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petitions are as under :The...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »