Chennai Court June 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.
Pondicherry Pond's (India) Ltd., Leather Products Division Employees W ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2001
Reported in: (2003)IIILLJ681Mad
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The above writ petition is filed by Pondicherry Pond's (India) Leather Products Division Employees' Welfare Union for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing second and third respondents not to give effect to its notice of lay off dated April 30, 2001, in respect of the workers of Hindustan Lever Ltd., Pond's Factory at Arumparthapuram, Pondicherry and holding that the said notice, dated April 30, 2001, is void ab initio and ultra vires of the provisions of Section 25-M read with Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act.2. The above writ petition has been filed on the following facts:The unit at Arumparthapuram was an establishment under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, employed 196 permanent workers out of which 117 workers were transferred to other locations which transfer orders are the subject-matter of dispute in Industrial Dispute No. 8 of 2000. The management securing the transfer of the workers was w...
A. Durai Vs. the Competent Authority and Personnal Assistant to the Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2001
Reported in: (2001)3MLJ311
A. Ramamurthi, J.1. The unsuccessful, plaintiff in both the Courts below is the appellant.2. The case in brief is as follows:The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that the notice in Form-B proposed to be issued on 22.1.1976 is illegal, unlawful, without jurisdiction and against the provisions of Act 27 of 1960 and other reliefs. The plaintiff was the erstwhile Secretary of S.G.R. Podunala Mandram and put up a semi-permanent structure at No. 29 Madley Road, T. Nagar, Madras-17. By the end of 1978, this Mandram was disbanded and A. Govindasamy Ninaivu Mandram was inaugurated in the same place. The said Mandram is still functioning with the plaintiff as its Secretary. The plaintiff was also detained under the provisions of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act from January 1976 to January 1977 in the Central Prison, Madras. Now, the plaintiff understands that a Notice in Form-B prescribed under Act 27 of 1960 was served to one Rathnavel Chettiar and another S.K. Shanmugam. At the ...
South India Surgical Company Vs. K. Govindan, Income-tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: [2001]251ITR78(Mad)
M. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. South India Surgical Company, Chennai, has filed these applications praying for quashing of the proceedings in four private complaints filed by the Income-tax Officer, the respondent herein, for the offences under Sections 276C, 277 and 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Sections 193, 196 and 420 along with Sections 34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, in respect of the four assessment years, namely, 1976-77 to 1979-80 with the allegation that there had been a concealment of income arising out of a search and seizure at the petitioner's premises. 2. Counsel for the petitioner has raised two points seeking for the quashing : (1) Though the complaint was filed in the year 1988, there is no progress in the trial. Since there is an inordinate delay in the conduct of the trial, the proceedings are liable to be quashed. (2) The penalty which was originally imposed upon the petitioner has been reduced by the Tribunal under Section 273A(4) of the Inco...
Nirmal and NavIn P. Ltd. and ors. Vs. D. Ravindran, Deputy Commissione ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR19(Mad)
M. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. Mainly contending that on the application filed by the petitioners/accused Nos. 7 to 10 before the Settlement Commission, the order of immunity has been passed from penalty as well as prosecution, these applications have been filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, seeking to quash the private complaint filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Special Range IX, Chennai, against ten accused including the petitioners.2. The first accused is the Express Newspapers Limited. Accused Nos. 2 to 6 are the directors and officers of Express Newspapers Limited. The petitioners being arrayed as accused Nos. 7 to 10 are the cold storage companies carrying on business in West Bengal and their directors. The petitioners/accused Nos. 7 to 10 are also trading in potato and were the agents of Express Newspapers Limited, the first accused, in its potato trading business during the years 1984 to 1986.3. The complainant, the Deputy Commissioner of Inc...
Gowrisankaran K. Vs. Labour Enforcement Officer (Central) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: [2002(94)FLR662]; (2002)ILLJ318Mad
ORDERM. Kapagavinayagam, J.1. Crl. O.P. Nos. 15482 and 11681 of 1999 are being disposed of by this common order, as both petitions for quashing would arise out of single complaint.2. Mr. Gowrisankaran, Assistant General Manager, Indian Bank and Ms. Hamsa Priya, Proprietrix, Salute, the accused in C.C. No. 3085 of 1999 on the file of the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, have filed both these petitions seeking for the quashing of the above proceedings.3. The Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), the respondent herein, inspected the premises of the petitioner-bank on February 18, 1999 and found that the petitioner-bank had employed 11 contract labourers through Ms. Hamsa priya, Proprietrix, Salute, Chennai in violation of the prohibitory notification issued by the Central Government dated December 9, 1976 under Section 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970.4. On the same day, the respondent sent a show cause notice to both the petitioners to show ...
Agarwal H.C. Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: (2002)IILLJ650Mad
ORDERM. Karagavinayagam, J.1. H. C. Agarwal, Deputy General Manager (E&T;), Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Chennai, is the Petitioner herein. Seeking to quash the proceedings in S.T.C. No. 1493 of 1997 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karaikkal. Initiated by the Labour Enforcement Officer, the Respondent herein, for the offence under Section 23 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to ] as 'The Act'), he has filed this Petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C.2. The Labour Enforcement Officer, Trichy, the Respondent herein inspected the establishment of the accused Petitioner on October 15, 1996 and found that there was a violation of the provisions of Section 10(1) of the Act as by the Notification dated September 8, 1994, the Government of India, Ministry of, Labour, prohibited employment of contract labourers as Radio Operators on the establishment. Contravening the said notification, issued under Section 10(1) of the Ac...
G.A. Ethiraj Vs. the State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4139
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. A Deputy Superintendent of Police, Law and Order, having caught in a web of trap in corruption case organised by an Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anit-Corruption, has been for a long number of years trying to wriggle out of the same by raising the ground that the investigation done by the subordinate officer, is illegal, as it is unauthorised.2. Mr. G.A. Ethiraj, the petitioner herein was the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Aranthangi, Pudukottai District in the year 1994-95. One Syed Ibrahim of Edayankadu gave a complaint to one Jayapaul, the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Aranthangi, on 27-5-1995 alleging that the Deputy Superintendent of Police the petitioner herein demanded a bribe of Rs. 10.000/- for taking effective action against some persons mentioned in the complaint given by the said Syed Ibrahim which was earlier registered in Crime No. 105/95 for the offence of theft. T his complaint was registered in Crime No. 2/95 ...
M. Muthuramalingam and Etc. Etc. Vs. District Forest Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ420
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. Crl. O.P. Nos. 15867, 17478 and 22720 of 1999 are being disposed of by this common order, as the question involved in all these three petitions is one and the same.2. These petitions have been filed under Section 482, Cr. P.C. to quash the proceedings in Wild Life, O.R. No. 1/1999-2000, dated 13-8-1999 imposing compounding fees on them for having committed offences under the Tamil Nadu Forest Act and the Wild Life Protection Act.3. The case of the petitioners as contained in their affidavits is as follows :--(a) M. Muthuramalingam, the petitioner in Crl. O.P. No. 15867 of 1999, is the former Panchayat President of Agamalai village. He is having coffee estate at Agamalai in Theni District.(b) P. V. Rajendiran, the petitioner in Crl. O.P. No. 17478 of 1999, is the resident of Vedaranyam and the former Honorary Wild Life Warden, besides he was the Member of Legislative Assembly for two terms and also the Member of Parliament for one term.(c) R. Rajagopala T...
Nirmal and NavIn (P) Ltd and ors. Vs. D. Ravindran, Deputy Commissione ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: (2002)173CTR(Mad)177; [2001]253ITR19(Mad)
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.Mainly contending that on the application filed by the petitioners/accused Nos. 7 to 10 before the Settlement Commission, the order of immunity has been passed from penalty as well as prosecution, these applications have been filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, seeking to quash the private complaint filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range IX, Chennai, against ten accused including the petitioners.The first accused is the Express Newspapers Limited. Accused Nos. 2 to 6 are the directors and officers of Express Newspapers Limited. The petitioners being arrayed as accused Nos. 7 to 10 are the cold storage companies carrying on business in West Bengal and their directors. The petitioners/accused Nos. 7 to 10 are also trading in potato and were the agents of Express Newspapers Limited, the first accused, in its potato trading business during the years 1984 to 1986.The complainant, the Deputy Commissioner filed a private ...
Kothari and Sons and ors. Vs. N. Subramanian
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2001
Reported in: [2001]252ITR153(Mad)
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.Since the issues raised in all these applications are one and the same, a common order is being passed.These applications have been filed by the companies directors and other employees seeking for quashing of the complaints filed against them by the Income Tax Officer, Central Circle, Chennai, for the offences under sections 120B, 193, 196, 420, 511 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sections 276C, 277 and 278 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were taken on file by the Trial Court in CC. Nos. 2181 to 2187 of 1982.These complaints were filed on 20-10-1982. The crux of the allegations contained in the complaints in question are as follows :'The company premises and residential premises belonging to the Kothari Group were searched by the income-tax officials in August, 1981. Several documents were seized. Those documents disclosed that the various amounts from the account of the companies were withdrawn under the guise of pay and allowance to be paid to thei...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »