Chennai Court February 2001 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.
Rajulu S. Vs. Management of Aurofood Private Limited and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-09-2001
Reported in: (2002)ILLJ213Mad
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J. 1. The petitioner was employed as a packer in the packing department of the first respondent biscuit factory from April 6, 1974. However, he was placed under suspension from April 26, 1981 and thereafter served with two charge memos dated April 28, 1981 and August 11, 1981 respectively. The first charge memo dated August 28, 1981 is for an alleged misconduct that the petitioner was found eating some biscuits while he was packing the biscuits and the second charge memo dated April 11, 1981 is for an alleged misconduct that he had abused his supervisor in filthy words. An enquiry was conducted on the said charges and by a report dated October 9, 1981, both the charges were held proved, finding that the petitioner was guilty of both the charges levelled against him. Hence a second show cause notice was issued to him on October 13, 1981, proposing to dismiss the petitioner from service, to which the petitioner submitted his explanation on October 19, 1981 and not sa...
Revathi Rajasekaran and anr. Vs. Vijayakumaran and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-09-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ1925; (2001)1MLJ672
K. Sampath, J.1. A ticklish problem has arisen because of the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in Chinnama George v. N.K. Raju : [2000]2SCR1050 , wherein the Supreme Court has held as follows (paras 10 and 8):.The insurer cannot maintain a joint appeal along with the owner or driver if defence on any ground under Section 149(2) is not available to it. In that situation joint appeal will be incompetent. It is not enough if the insurer is struck out from the array of the appellants. The appellate court must also be satisfied that a defence which is permitted to be taken by the insurer under the Act was taken in the pleadings and was pressed before the Tribunal. On the appellate court being so satisfied the appeal may be entertained for examination of the correctness or otherwise of the judgment of the Tribunal on the question arising from/relating to such defence taken by the insurer. If the appellate court is not satisfied that any such question was raised by the insurer in the pleadi...
Sundararajan N. Vs. Indian Overseas Bank and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-09-2001
Reported in: (2001)ILLJ912Mad
ORDERF.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. It is unfortunate that the once settled matter was sought to be reopened at the instance of the respondents and thereby causing harassment to the petitioner for no fault of his.2. The brief background of the case was that the petitioner who was appointed as a Clerk on April 22, 1981 was issued with the chargesheet, dated December 13, 1997, in which it was alleged that he unauthorisedly made fraudulent debit entries totalling Rs.75,500/- in the S.B. A/c. No. 40723 of one Master Kaushik and misappropriated the said amount. It was stated therein that by virtue of the said conduct of the petitioner, it amounted to commission of gross misconduct falling within paragraphs 17.5 (d) and 17.5(j) of the Bipartite Settlement. It is relevant to note that the said chargesheet dated December 15, 1997 was issued by one Thiru R. Sudarsanan in his capacity as the disciplinary authority. On submission of the explanation by the petitioner, the said disciplinary authority...
G. Manjula Vs. the Principal Amala Annai Teacher Training Institute Ti ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2001
Reported in: (2001)1MLJ786
ORDER1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the selection list published by the 1st respondent dated 19.9.2000 selecting the candidate for the Diploma Course in Teacher Training in the 1st respondent school and for a consequential direction to the 1st respondent to select and admit the petitioner for the Diploma Course in Teacher Training in the 1st respondent school.2. The petitioner successfully completed her higher secondary course examination conducted during 1998 from Mary Immaculate Girls HigherSecondary School, Tiruppathur, Vellore District and secured 1019/1200 marks. The petitioner applied for admission to Diploma in Teacher Training Education in the 1st respondent school for the academic year 2000-2001. According to the petitioner, the 1st respondent is a minority institution recognised by the Government of Tamil Nadu and the 1st respondent namely institution is under the control of the 2nd respondent namely the Director of Teacher Education, Research and ...
Dr. J. Gopalakrishnan Vs. Smt. N. Shanthi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2001
Reported in: [2001]106CompCas571(Mad)
B. Akbar Basha Khadiri, J. 1. The instant criminal original petition has arisen in this way : The respondent Shanthi instituted proceedings in C.C. No. 1117 of 1998 on the file of the 13th Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, by preferring a private complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for an alleged offence committed by the petitioner herein under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. According to her, the petitioner issued a post-dated cheque on July 18, 1997, for Rs. 20,00,000 and when the cheque was presented in the Bank, it was returned with an endorsement 'exceeds arrangements'. The respondent/complainant issued a statutory notice on December 11,1997, which the petitioner/accused received on December 13, 1997. According to her, since there was no payment even after efflux of the statutory period, she had preferred a private complaint. 2. The petitioner/accused seeks to quash the proceedings on the ground that it is not as if he was not prepared t...
Printing and General Workers Union Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2001
Reported in: [2001(89)FLR512]; (2001)ILLJ1578Mad
Raviraja Pandian, J.1. In the above writ petition, the petitioner Printing and General Workers Union represented by its President seeks this Court to issue writ of mandamus directing the second respondent herein namely, The National Small Industries Corporation. Ltd., to implement the notification bearing No. S.O. 779(F), dated December 9, 1976 issued by the Government of India and consequently direct the second respondent to absorb and regularise the services of the contract workmen employed as security and watch and ward whose names are appended with the writ petition.2. The said claim is based on the notification issued as supplement to the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 dated December 9, 1976. By the said notification, the Central Government issued directions by exercising the power under Sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, prohibition the employment of contract labour on and from March 1, 1977 for sweepin...
Union Bank of India Vs. Six Star Hosieries and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2001
Reported in: [2003]115CompCas495(Mad)
E. Padmanabhan, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 245 of 1983 on the file of the Sub-court, Tirupur, in so far as the trial court had exonerated the fourth defendant decreeing the suit against all the other defendants. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Mr. Viswanatha Rao appears for respondent No. 4. Though the other respondents have been served with the notice in the above appeal they have not appeared.2. The point raised in this appeal lies in a narrow controversy and it may not be necessary to set out the details of the pleadings in the suit since it is not necessary to go into other issues, which have been answered in favour of the appellant. For convenience sake the parties to this appeal will be referred as arrayed before the trial court.3. The plaintiff instituted the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,24,085.44 with interest at 14 per cent p. a. being the amount due advanced on a mortgage. Defendants Nos. 2 to 6 are the partner...
P. Anwer Batcha and Another Vs. Tamilarasai and 5 Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ931; (2001)1MLJ497
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. Aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate), Pudukkottai in M.C.O.P.No.181 of 1993, dated 10.1.1996, the owner and the insurer of the vehicle in question have filed the above appeal questioning the 'negligence' and 'quantum of compensation' arrived at by the Tribunal in respect of death of one Jayaraman in a motor vehicle accident that took place at 6.00 a.m., on 26.6.1992, the wife, children and parents of the deceased have prayed for a compensation of Rs.15 lakhs. The Tribunal, by the impugned order dated 10.1.1996 passed an award for Rs.5,60,000.00 with interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Questioning the said award, the owner of the Ambassador Car TN-31 Z 0270 and his insurer viz., National Insurance Company preferred the above appeal. The claimants have preferred Cross Objection No.10 of 2001 for further sum of Rs.4,40,00...
Madurai District Pandiyan Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ718
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. The Madurai District Pandiyan Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd., represented by its Special Officer, the appellant herein, has filed this appeal challenging the judgment of the Special Court dated 5-4-1994 in S.T.C. No. 18 of 1993 convicting the appellant and another under Clause 6 (3) and 14(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Scheduled Comodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order, 1982 read with Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act and sentencing the appellant to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-.2. The case of the prosecution is as follows :--(a) The appellant/the first accused is the authorised dealer to distribute essential commodities to the family cardholders and they are doing so through their various fair price shops situate at various places.(b) One Pandi, the second accused, was the salesman of the fair price shop situate at Prasad Road, Narimedu, Madunal. He was responsible and in charge of the day-to-day affairs of the said ...
R. Balasubramanian Vs. Sathasivam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-07-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ3460
ORDERA. Ramamurthi, J.1. Petitioner/accused in C.C. No. 309 of 1997 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. III of Erode has preferred the miscellaneous petition aggrieved against the orders passed in Crl. M.P. No. 548 of 2000 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode dated 29-11-2000.2. The case in brief is as follows :The respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner for an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. After the closure of the prosecution case, the petitioner filed a petition to obtain the opinion of the Handwriting Expert in C.M.P. No. 4115 of 1998 before the trial Court and the same was dismissed. Aggrieved against this, the petitioner has preferred Crl. R. C. No. 157 of 1999 before this Court and the same is pending. Even though the revision is pending, the trial Court has closed the defence side suo motu and posted the case for arguments. Under the circumstance, the petitioner moved the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode, for transfer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »