Chennai Court February 2001 Judgments
The Principal and Secretary Madras Christian College East Tambaram, Ma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: (2001)2MLJ501
ORDERE. Padmanabhan, J.1. We have heard Mr.T.V. Ramanujam, learned senior Counsel for the appellants, Mr.K. Chandru, learned senior counsel for the first respondent and Mr.V. Rengaraju, learned Government Advocate for the second respondent in this appeal.2. This writ appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned single Judge dated 16.12.1997 made in W.P.No.4839 of 1995 on the file of this Court. The first respondent herein moved the second respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act for adirection, while complaining that, being the senior most, had not been posted as the Head of the Department, which is in violation of Rule 11(4)(1) of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Rules as well as the Grant Rules. The second respondent herein, after affording necessary opportunity, by proceedings dated 24.11.1994, directed the first appellant herein to designate the first respondent herein as the Head of the Department and also held t...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.A.L. Ramaswamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: [2001]250ITR368(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. Counsel for the Revenue submits that Civil Appeals Nos. 5751-5757 of 1997, are pending in the Supreme Court on identical issues. Having regard to that submission, and also having regard to the fact that the issue raised is one of general importance concerning as it does, the interpretation of the provisions of the agreement concerning relief from double taxation between India and Malaysia, the certificate sought is granted....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Om. Sp. L. Sp. Meyyappa Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: [2001]250ITR448(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1. Counsel for the Revenue submits that Civil Appeals Nos. 5751-5757 of 1997 is pending in the Supreme Court on identical issues. Having regard to that submission, and also having regard to the fact that the issue raised is one of general importance concerning as it does, the interpretation of the provisions of the agreement concerning relief from double taxation between India and Malaysia, the certificate sought is granted....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Unnamalai Achi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: [2001]251ITR860(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1. Counsel for the Revenue submits that Civil Appeals Nos. 5751 to 5757 of 1997 are pending in the Supreme Court on identical issues. Having regard to that submission, and also having regard to the fact that the issue raised is one of general importance concerning as it does, the interpretation of the provisions of the agreement concerning relief from double taxation between India and Malaysia, the certificate sought is granted....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. C.R. Alagappa Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: [2002]257ITR432(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. Counsel for the Revenue submits that Civil Appeals Nos. 5751-5757 of 1997 are pending in the Supreme Court on identical issues. Having regard to that submission and also having regard to the fact that the issue raised is one of general importance concerning as it does the interpretation of the provisions of the agreement concerning relief from double taxation between India and Malaysia, the certificate sought is granted....
Tag this Judgment!Indian Bank Officers' Association Vs. Indian Bank and Anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ541Mad; (2001)2MLJ163
ORDERD. Murugesan, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction and in particular in the nature of a declaration that the decision of the respondent-bank to deny the benefits of sick leave, leave fare concession, casual leave and medical aid as provided in the Indian Bank Officers Service Regulations, 1979 to the VRS optees as illegal and unconstitutional and for a consequential prayer to direct the respondents to grant the same to all the officers until they are relieved from service.2. According to the petitioner association, the members of the association are officers in the respondent Indian Bank. The respondent-bank introduced the Indian Bank Employees Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2000 by a circular dated November 9, 2000. The employees who are desirous of availing the scheme were directed to submit their applications from November 27, 2000 to December 26, 2000. The implementation of the scheme will depend on the number of applications that are received...
Tag this Judgment!Srikanth Vs. G.R. Ebinezer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ1239; (2001)IILLJ1307Mad; (2001)2MLJ646
V. Bakthavatsallu, J. 1. The respondent in the workman compensation case is the appellant herein. The respondent herein filed an application for compensation.2. The case of the petitioner is as follows: The petitioner was working as a machine operator under the respondent for the past two years on a monthly wages of Rs. 750. On December 30, 1989, at about 7.30 p.m., while the petitioner was feeding materials in the reprocessing machine, the right hand was trapped into the machine, as a result of which he sustained grievous injuries. Due to the above accident, the petitioner sustained crush amputation of right index finger and right middle finger. The petitioner was treated as an outpatient at the Government Hospital, Madras and subsequently, he took treatment at a clinic in Porur. The expenses incurred at the above clinic was barred by the respondent. The surgeon has assessed the disability as 20%. The petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs. 25,000 as compensation.3. The case of the res...
Tag this Judgment!M. Kuppammal and ors. Vs. Chennai Metropolitan Transport Corporation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-20-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC734
ORDERPrabha Sridevan, J.1. This petition has been filed by the claimants for withdrawal of a sum of Rs. 70,909/-, which is lying to the credit of MACT O.P. No. 2412 of 1995 on the file of , the II Judge, MACT, Chennai.2. It is represented by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondent Corporation had filed C.M.A. No. 1414 of 1999 against the same award and it was dismissed on 12.10.1999 by this Court. Therefore, the C.M.A. filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation alone is now pending.3. In these circumstances, the petitioner herein who is the fourth petitioner is entitled to withdraw the sum of Rs. 70,909/-. The other three petitioners have already withdrawn the amounts earlier. This petitioner was at that time a minor and has filed this petition after attaining majority.4. Therefore, the petition is ordered accordingly.And this Court both further order that this order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned....
Tag this Judgment!Muthulingam Vs. Gangai Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-19-2001
Reported in: (2001)1MLJ745
ORDER1. The above civil revision petition has been directed against the order of the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Kattumannarkoil dated 13.11.2000 in I.A.No.304 of 2000 in O.S.No.18 of 2000 wherein the learned Judge set aside the ex parte order dated 20.12.99 passed against the third defendant. 2. The petitioner herein instituted a civil suit in O.S.No.1083 of 88 on the file of the District Munsif, Chidambaram against the respondent herein and3 others for partition and separate possession of his 1/3rd share in the suit properties. Except third defendant, other defendants entered appearance through their counsel and filed written statement. Since the third defendant was said to be residing at Singapore, summons were taken for his Singapore address. Since summons were returned unserved because the third defendant was not at Singapore, at the request of the plaintiff, the learned District Munsif, Chidambaram granted service of notice of publication in Tamil Daily; acco...
Tag this Judgment!Palanisamy R. and 6 ors. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-19-2001
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ1693Mad
ORDERK. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The above writ petition is filed seeking for the relief of issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the order made in I.A. No. 30/2000 in I.D. No. 233/1999 dated March 10, 2000 made by the first respondent Labour Court and quash the same and directing the respondents to implead the petitioners as respondent in I.D. No. 233 of 1999 on the file of the Labour Court, Salem.2. The case of the petitioners, who are seven in number is that they are working as Marketing Assistants in the 3rd respondent Society having been appointed as packers Grade II during the year 1991 and that subsequently they were promoted as Marketing Assistants with effect from September 9, 1997 under the proceedings in Na. Ka. No. 126/97 Pa. Tho (7) by the Managing Director of the 3rd respondent.3. According to the petitioners, 9 employees of the 3rd respondent Society who are not qualified or ineligible to be promoted questioned the promotion of t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »