Chennai Court April 2000 Judgments
Lavanya Enterprises Vs. Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Environ ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: [2006]145STC442(Mad)
K. Govindarajan, J. 1. The appellant-firm has filed the above writ appeal aggrieved by the orders of the learned single Judge passed in W.P. Nos. 17798, 8343 and 8344 of 1999 dated November 22, 1999. 2. The appellant participated in the auction conducted by the second respondent for the sale of 20 M.Ts. and 33 M.Ts. of sandal-wood. The said auction was held on February 25, 1999 and the same was confirmed by the second respondent by the orders dated March 17, 1999. Along with the confirmation order, a statement showing the amount to be paid by the appellant was furnished. Among other items, as per the condition No. 27 of the sale notice, the appellant was asked to pay a sum of Rs. 6,13,530 by way of sales tax at 8 per cent on the sale of 20 M.Ts. and Rs. 9,12,000 towards the sales tax on the total sale amount of 33 M.Ts. of sandalwood. Though the appellant informed the authorities in their letter dated April 5, 1999 that they are not liable to pay sales tax, in the letter dated April 13...
Tag this Judgment!Alagappan Vs. Thilagam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-25-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3239
ORDERI. David Christian, J.1. This petition is filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. praying this Court to set aside the order passed in Crl. R.C. No. 4 of 1998, on the file of the Principal District Sessions Judge, Pudukottai as per which the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Pudukottai in Crl. M.P. No. 3340 of 1996 was confirmed.2. The petitioner Alagappan is a resident of Narimedu in Pudukkottai. His wife Thilagam filed M.C. No. 14 of 1994 before the Judicial Magistrate No. II, Pudukkottai praying for maintenance under Section 125, Cr.P.C. The petitioner who was impleaded as respondent in M.C. entered appearance and during pendency of the said petition, both the petitioner and his wife entered into a compromise on 15-2-1995 as per which the petitioner agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 300/- as maintenance to the wife, the respondent in this petition and the learned Magistrate has passed an order dated 15-2-1995 directing the petitioner to pay the said amount.3. While so, in the yea...
Tag this Judgment!Anuma Precision Tool Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Cus.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-25-2000
Reported in: 2000(121)ELT309(Mad)
ORDERK. Sampath, J.1. The prayer is for a Mandamus to the first respondent to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs. 84,169/- with interest at 18% per annum from 11-2-1992 till the date of payment.2. The basis of the claim is as follows :The Government of India granted permission to the petitioner, which is a 100% export oriented unit engaged in the manufacture of high precision tools, etc., to import grinding machines for the above purpose. By letter No. E.0.133 (87)/Misc, Government of India, Ministry of Industry, Department of Industrial Development Secretariat. By another letter from the Chief Controller of Imports Exports F. No. 2/400/87/M7AC/374 dated 25-7-1990, the petitioner was asked to step up its export to enrich the foreign exchange reserve of our country. The machines were imported by the petitioner on 16-7-1990 under a Bill of Entry No. 028980, dated 16-7-1990. When the machines were about to be released for home consumption, the goods were taken over by the Special Investigatio...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendran Vs. the Union of India, Rep by the Secretary, Government of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-24-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2876; 2000(2)CTC469
ORDERK. Natarajan, J.1. The question referred to the Full Bench by the division bench consisting of V.S.Sirpurkar and D.Murugesan, JJ reads as follows:-' Whether, in the grounds in support of the detention orders passed under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, if there is a failure on the part of the authority to inform the detenu about his right to make a representation to the Advisory Board, is the detention order vitiated ?. In short, would such failure breach the right of the detenu under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India 7'.2. As per the orders of My Lord, the Chief Justice, the full Bench hasbeen constituted to decide the said question. One Rajendran, claiming to be thefriend of Saravanan alias Kumar alias Lakshmanan alias Methyan alias Babuand Jayaprakash alias J.P. alias Siva alias Karmuhll alias Arul alias Rameshalias Madhiyan alias Koolaiyan, has filed these two petitions praying that theorder of detention passed against them by the District Collector-cum-Dis...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Institute of Architects Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-24-2000
Reported in: 2000(121)ELT609(Mad); 2006[2]STR295
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. This is an appeal filed. against the order passed in W.P. No. 773 of 1999 dated 21-1-2000.2. The appellant herein has filed the writ petition for the issue of a writ of declaration to declare some of the provisions of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 and the Rules framed thereunder and the Finance Act, 1994 (Act 32 of 1994) as amended by Notifications issued thereunder levying service tax on the persons carrying on the profession of architecture as ultra vires of the Constitution of India. The writ petitioner is the Indian Institute of Architects, Prospects Chamber, Annexe, 5th Floor, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai, represented by its President.3. This Court in W.P.M. No. 1028 of 1999 in W.P. No. 773 of 1999, by order dated 22-1-1999, granted interim stay of the operation of the relevant provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 (Act 32 of 1994). The petitioner herein has taken out a contempt application on the ground that the authorities in other States have not chosen ...
Tag this Judgment!Tamil Nadu Tamil and English Schools Association (Regd. No.17/94) Nos. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)CTC344; (2000)IIMLJ575
ORDERJudgement pronounced by A.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J.1. The State of Tamil Nadu passed G.O.Ms.No.6 (School Education C2 Department), dated 13.1.1999, to the effect that from the academic year 1999.2000 all the nursery and elementary Schools shall teach at least two out of three subjects i.e. Social Studies (History and Geography) Mathematics and Science through the medium of Tamil, apart from teaching Tamil as a subject. The Government Order imposed some more conditions and announced certain concessions. It is necessary that the English translation of the said Government Order, as furnished by the State has to be quoted:GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU ABSTRACTElementary Education-Tamil as Medium of Instruction in Nursery and Elementary Schools-Implementation/Orders Issued.SCHOOL EDUCATION, (C2) DEPARTMENTG.O.Ms.No.6Dated : 13.1.1999Read:1. Letter (Ms.) No.377, School Education, dated 28.8.19972. G.O.(Ms.) No.421, School Education, dated 27.11.1998-------...
Tag this Judgment!Padavettai and ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Mad524
ORDERY. Venkatachalam, J.1. Invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners herein have filed the present writ petition, seeking for a writ of Certiorari to call for the records from the respondents relating to the notification published in the Dt. Gazette of Dharmapuri dated 10-10-1990 in so far as it relates to the petitioners' portion in S. No. 22 of Elakalahalli village, Dharmapuri Taluk and to quash the same.2. In support of the writ petition, the petitioners herein have filed an affidavit wherein they have narrated all the facts and circumstances that forced them to file the present writ petition and requested this Court to allow the writ petition as prayed for, per contra, on behalf of the respondents a counter-affidavit has been filed rebutting all the material allegations levelled against them one after the other and ultimately they have requested this Court to dismiss the writ petition for want of merits.3. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counse...
Tag this Judgment!Management of Triplicane Urban Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. Presiding ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: [2000(86)FLR797]; (2000)IILLJ1347Mad; (2000)IIMLJ737
ORDERT. Meenakumari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner Management has chosen to question the award passed in I.D. No. 404 of 1988, dated October 1, 1991 on the file of the first respondent-Labour Court, Madras.2. The second respondent was engaged as a sales assistant in Kamadhenu Co-operative Super Market and he was posted to work at the other branches of the petitioner-Society and was paid a salary of Rs. 472 per month. A memo dated June 15, 1983 was issued to the second respondent for his having caused the stock deficit to the tune of Rs. 22,409.96 as on May 31, 1983. By his explanation dated June 29, 1983, the petitioner has stated that since he was not in a position to make good the shortage amount, the same may be recovered from his salary.3. On July 29, 1983, the petitioner-Society ordered for an enquiry and the second respondent participated in the enquiry and exhibits were marked. Before the Enquiry Officer, the second respondent seems to have admitted his guilt. The E...
Tag this Judgment!Sundaram G. Vs. Management of Ramakrishna Steel Industries Ltd. and an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: (2000)IILLJ979Mad; (2000)IIMLJ644
Ms. Prabha Sridevan, J. 1. The writ petitioner, an employee of the respondent raised an industrial dispute relating to his non-employment which resulted in an Award passed in the workman's favour on March 7, 1983. Against this, the management filed Writ Petition No. 6861 of 1983, which was allowed by the learned single Judge. The workman has therefore filed the present writ appeal.2. The facts are as follows: - The appellant, an employee in the Core Shops of the first respondent company was charged of various acts of misconduct by a show cause notice dated April 15, 1981. Two charges were framed against the writ appellant:1. Use of disrespectful and abusive language. 2. Intimidation of senior officials. 3. The appellant sent his reply on April 18, 1981 denying the charges and stating that the management was deliberately adopting a vindictive attitude.4. An enquiry was conducted, where the Enquiry Officer examined the Supervisor and a co-worker on the side of the Management. The appell...
Tag this Judgment!V. Krishnan and Etc. Vs. Inspector of Police and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3684
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J.1. These two writ appeals are directed against the common order dated 27-3-2000 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. Nos. 5245 and 5246 of 2000.2. These appellants are husband and wife and they are arrayed as accused in C.C. No. 839 of 1999 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Gothambooth Nagar, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. That criminal case originated pursuant to a complaint filed by one Dr. Purushothamlal and he alleged that these appellants have committed offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506(2) of I.P.C. It appears that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Noida, U.P. has taken cognizance and issued non-bailable warrant against these appellants. When these warrants issued against these appellants were about to be executed, the appellants filed criminal application before this Court and a learned single Judge of this Court was pleased to grant interim bail till 3-4-2000 and directed the appellants to appear before the Chief Judicia...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »