Chennai Court June 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.
Managing Director, Thanthai Periyar Transport Corporation Vs. Sundaram ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ1101; (1999)3MLJ530
M. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. The award directing the Thanthai Periyar Transport Corporation, the appellant herein, to pay the compensation of Rs. 1,20,000 towards the death of the deceased boy, aged about 8 years, to the petitioners, respondents herein, is being challenged in this appeal.2. On 13.5.1990, at about 7.00 a.m., the deceased Dakshnamurthy, son of the claimants was sitting as a pillion rider in the cycle driven by one Karunanidhi, PW 2, to go to Veterinary Hospital at Orlean-pet, in order to give treatment to the hen carried by him. At about 7.15 a.m., when they reached Maraimalai Adigal Salai, near Mullai Nagar U curve, both of them got down from the cycle and went to the barricade, at the centre of the said road. While they were about to reach the barricade, the bus belonging to the appellant Corporation came at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed against the deceased boy and the front wheel of the said bus ran over his body. Due to the impact, the said ...
Sagayaraj and ors. Vs. J. therasa
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-1999
Reported in: (1999)3MLJ211
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. Sagayaraj, Jesuraj. and Regina, the petitioners herein, challenging the fair order and decretal order dated 7.6.1995 passed in I.A. No. 442 of 1993 in O.S. No. 98 of 1982 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Mannargudi, have filed this civil revision petition.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present petition are as follows:(a) Therasa, the respondent herein, filed a suit in O.S. No. 98 of 1982 against the petitioners for specific performance of the agreement of sale executed by the defendants 1 and 2 in the suit in her favour on 4.2.1981. The trial court passed a decree on 17.2.1984 directing the defendants 1 and 2 to execute the sale deed in favour of the respondent in respect of the entire suit property, failing which the sale deed shall be executed by the court on behalf of the defendants.(b) Thereafter, the plaintiff filed an execution petition in E.P. No. 412 of 1991. In pursuance of the execution petition, the sale deed was also execut...
Maruthi Bus Service and anr. Vs. Sudha and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-21-1999
Reported in: I(2000)ACC430
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. M/s. Maruthi Bus Service and the National Insurance Company Limited are the appellants in this appeal.2. The award, directing the second appellant, on behalf of the first appellant, to pay the compensation of Rs. 3,99,500/- as against the claim of total compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-, is the subject matter of the challenge before this Court in this appeal.3. On 3.4.1993, at about 2.00 p.m., Muthu @ Muthusami was riding on his cycle in Pattukkottai-Mannargudi Road and proceeding towards east, by keeping his left. When he was nearing Paddappaikadu village, the bus belonging to the first appellant's Bus Service bearing Registration No. TN-55-4585 came towards east at a very high speed. When the deceased was going on his left side of the road, the bus, driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit against the cyclist. Due to the impact, the said Muthusami was thrown out. The cycle also got damaged fully. Though the victim-deceased was taken to the hospital and was gi...
Pallavan Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. A. Anbu Sathiya (Minor) Rep. b ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-19-1999
Reported in: II(2001)ACC603
ORDERJagadeesan, J.1. This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. M. Krishnamoorthy, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mr. M. Swamikkannu, Advo cate for the respondent and having stood over for consideration till this day the Court made the following order:The petitioner has filed the petition for condoning the delay of 205 days in filing the appeal against the award in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 2000/92 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madras.2. The petitioner has stated in the affidavit that the normal practice is that the Counsel who appeared for the petitioner Corporation has to file the copy application for obtaining the certified copies of the judgment and decree. On receipt of the same, they have to forward the copies to the petitioner with their opinion as to the feasibility of filing the appeal. In this case, the Counsel who appeared for the petitioner has not filed the ...
A. Venugopal and ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Mad431; (1999)IIMLJ731
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J. 1. Since the issues in both the writ petitions are one and the same, they are being disposed of by the following common order. In W.P. No. 4207/90, the petitioner seeks a writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from collecting the excess tax for his vehicles T.M. X. 6817, T.C. X. 3886 and T.M.T. 7346 and direct them to collect the tax applicable for vehicles of similar horse power at cubic capacity or unladen weight which could be 1/3 the tax that has been levied for the said three vehicles. In W. P. No. 4312/90 the petitioner, owner of a car bearing Registration No. TMJ 8039, has prayed for a writ of declaration declaring Article 7(b) of Schedule I of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1974 as illegal and ultra vires and consequently direct the respondents to classify the car bearing Registration No. TMJ 8039 as Indian vehicle.2. According to the petitioner in W.P. No. 4207 of 90, he had purchased 3 foreign vehicles, namely, (1) Peugeot 504 of 1...
K.V. Kandasamy and ors. Vs. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Bra ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4282
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. This is an application to quash the entire proceedings pending in P.R.C. No. 6 of 1994 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Pollachi filed by the petitioners A1 to A5.2. The petitioners were charge-sheeted on 31-12-1993 for the offences under Sections 120B, 395, 201,467,471 and 109, IPC. The following is the gist of the charge-sheet:-The first petitioner Al was the sitting MLA for Kinathukadavu constituency in 1983. The second petitioner A2 is the younger son and fourth petitioner is the younger brother of Al. The third petitioner A3 was an accountant under the first petitioner. The fifth petitioner A5 was working as Tahsildar at Pollachi. During the last week of January, 1983, the petitioners 1 to 3 and approvers Sugamaran and Rathinaswamy hatched a criminal conspiracy at the house of the first petitioner at Negaman by agreeing to do certain acts of dacoity by cutting the two live rose-wood trees standing in Government poromboke lands a...
Chakra Textile and anr. Vs. Jeevan Enterprises
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1999
Reported in: [2001]103CompCas807(Mad)
A. Ramamurthi, J.1. Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records relating to C. C. No. 998 of 1996 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. II, Karur and quash the proceedings.2. The case in brief is as follows :The respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'NI Act') against petitioners/ accused Nos. 1 and 2 and the same is pending' in C. C. No. 998 of 1996 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. II, Karur. The case relates to dishonour of the cheque bearing No. 133310, dated Octobers, 1995, for a sum of Rs. 35,000 drawn on Lakshmi Vilas Bank, Karur. The complaint was filed on May 14, 1996. The cheque was originally presented for encashment at the Bank of Baroda, Karur branch and the same was returned on December 11, 1995, with an endorsement 'Insufficient Funds'. The respondent issued a notice on December 20, 1995 through Mr. Ponnusamy, advocate, and the same was received by ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. E.V. Subramanian
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1999
Reported in: [2000]243ITR281(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. This is rather a curious case where the Appellate Tribunal has upheld the claim by a practising chartered accountant with substantial income, that he is entitled to the benefit of Section 80U of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the ground that he suffered from 'hypertension' for ten years. Strangely enough even though the doctor, whose certificate produced by the assessee, did not state that such hypertension was a disability, the Tribunal has treated 'hypertension' as amounting to permanent physical disability. The Tribunal has also taken the view that despite the increase in the income of the assessee year after year, the assessee was nevertheless to be regarded as suffering from a permanent physical disability which had the effect of reducing substantially his income earning capacity.2. The assessment years are 1981-82 and 1982-83. We are informed by counsel at the Bar, that at that time, the assessee was aged about 55 years and was a partner in more than one fir...
Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. T. Abdul Wahid
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1999
Reported in: [2000]242ITR665(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The questions referred to us arise out of a demand for gift-tax consequent to the reconstitution of a firm, by which reconstitution, the share of the assessee was reduced and the shares allotted to another partner who was newly inducted and to a minor to whom the benefits of the partnership was extended. The Gift-tax Officer regarded that reconstitution effected on April 1, 1971, as resulting in a gift from the assessee to Smt. P. Fareeda Begum, who was the newly admitted partner and to the minor Mohammed Akhtar, who was admitted to the benefits of the partnership to each of whom a 10 per cent. share in the profits was allotted, as, consequent to their admission, the profit sharing ratio of the other partners was reduced. That view of the Gift-tax Officer was upheld by the Commissioner but was reversed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.2. The following questions have been referred to us at the instance of the Revenue :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circ...
Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd. Vs. Pavunraj and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-17-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ616; (1999)IIMLJ716
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. These two appeals are being disposed of in the common judgment as they both arise out of a common award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Pudukottai in M.C.O.P. Nos. 199 and 200 of 1990 respectively.2. Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd., challenging the award in M.C.O.P. No. 199 of 1990 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Pudukottai directing for the payment of compensation of Rs. 20,000 and against the award in M.C.O.P. No. 200 of 1990 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal directing the payment of compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 have filed these two appeals.3. The facts that are required for the disposal of these two appeals are as follows:The deceased in this case is one Durairaj aged about 40 years. On 29.6.1989 he travelled in the town bus belonging to the appellant Corporation proceeding from Aavanam to Neduvasal. When the bus came to Neduvasal and stopped at the bus stand, the passengers ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »