Chennai Court July 2001 Judgments
S. Lalitha Sundari and Another Vs. Thiru. R. Kethar Nathan and 3 Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Mad17; (2001)3MLJ336
ORDER1. The two revision petitioners are women who claim that they have been discriminated against because they are women.2. They responded to an invitation to all female descendants of the founders' families of a Trust and they found that the post for which they had applied were filled up by the Scheme Court by appointing men. The background of the case is this:Anbanathapuram Vahaira Charities (AVC) was founded by five families hailing from the following villages. Anbanathapuram, Enathimangatam, Pallavarayapet, Karkudy and Kanganamputhur. The trust was found with the object of performing certain charities. A Scheme decree was passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai in O.S.No.68 of 1948. It was intended that the Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai shall be the Scheme Judge as far as the AVC was concerned. Subsequently, the Scheme was amended by the Scheme decree dated 6.4.1960 in O.S.No.17 of 1960. As per the provision in the Scheme, a college was established under the na...
Tag this Judgment!Prasad Productions Private Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Collector of Cus., Madras
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2001
Reported in: 2002(141)ELT619(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. Petitioner's contract for importing project materials/machineries and other allied equipments was admittedly registered with the respondents under the provisions of the Project Imports Regulations, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations') by proceedings of the Assistant Collector of Customs, dated 15-9-1993, pursuant to the said proceedings dated 15-9-1993, the petitioner had executed a bond for a sum of Rs. 1,98,55,000.00 and also paid a sum of Rs. 94,542-00 towards 5% of C.I.F. value (Cost, Insurance and Freight Value), on 15-9-1993 itself.2. As per Regulation 3(a) of the Regulations, an 'Industrial plant' is defined as under :Regulation 3(a) : 'Industrial plant' means as industrial system designed to be employed directly in the performance of any process or series of processes necessary for manufacture, production or extraction of a commodity, but does not include - (i) establishments designed to offer services of any description such as hotels, hospi...
Tag this Judgment!Thirumuruga Kirupananda Variyar Thavathiru Sundaran Swamigal Medical, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Mad42; (2001)3MLJ433
K. Narayana Kurup, J. 1. The Managing Trustee of Thirumuruga Kirupananda Variyar Thavathiru Sundara Swamigal Medical, Educational and Charitable Trust, Salem (hereinafter referred to as the Trust') had submitted an application to the Government of Tamil Nadu in terms of the guidelines laid down by the Government in G.O.Ms. No. 371, Education, Science and Technology Department, dated 10-5-1995, for declaring the medical institutions (subject-matter of this writ appeal) run by it at Salem as a Linguistic minority institution. The Government, after verification of the documents produced by the Trust, declared, vide G.O.Ms. No. 532, Health and Family Welfare Department, dated 27-10-1997, that the Vinayaga Missions' Kirupananda Variyar Medical College run by the appellant/Trust is eligible for minority status on linguistic basis for 1997-98 (?) and the Chairman of the appellant/Trust was directed to admit students in the medical College run by it for the aforesaid year in the ratio of 50 : ...
Tag this Judgment!Management of Kavarakkal Estate, Nepc Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2001
Reported in: (2002)ILLJ217Mad
E. Padmanabhan, J. 1. The Management of Kavarakkal Estate is the petitioner herein. The petitioner-management prays for the issue of a certiorari calling for the record relating to the award, dated May 8, 1995, passed by the first respondent Labour Court, Coimbatore, in I.D. Nos. 306/1993, 66/1994, 265/1994 and quash the same. 2. Heard Sri Ravindran for T.S. Gopalan and Company for the petitioner. None appears for respondents Nos. 2 to 4, who are the contesting respondents. 3. The petitioner, a tea estate in Valparai framed charges against 11 plantation labourers on September 19, 1991 as they refused to apply manure and were idling till twelve noon and left the field. On September 20, 1991, the petitioner issued a show-cause notice to all the eleven workers setting out the details of misconducts as well as commissions and omissions on their part, committed by them on September 19, 1991 and calling upon them to show cause as to why apart from non payment of wages for the period when the...
Tag this Judgment!Karapettal Nadar Boys Higher Secondary School, TuticorIn Represented b ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2001
Reported in: (2001)3MLJ252
V.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. This judgment will govern both the writ appeals. Writ Appeal No. 395 of 1997 emanates out of W.P.No. 4841 of 1988, which was dismissed in default on 4.3.1997. The restoration application was also dismissed on 18.10.1997 and therefore the writ appeal was filed. Writ Petition No. 4841 of 1988 challenges the order dated 21.1.1988 passed by the first respondent. By that order, the department resumed the excess post of Zoology teacher in the petitioner school. There is a slight history behind this writ petition.2. The petitioner is a school. In the year 1985, two post graduate teachers became surplus. They were Zoology and Economics. The school had already applied for the Commerce faculty and therefore they made an application on 10.5.1986 for converting the Zoology teacher into Mathematics teacher and Economics teacher into Commerce teacher. Now, it is an accepted position that this application dated 10.5.1986 which was followed by a reminder dated 22.5.1986 was never ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tamil Nadu Agro Industries Corporation ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-2001
Reported in: [2002]255ITR473(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1. The Tribunal has decided that the request for extension of time had been made under Section 139(1) and that the request had not been refused. In the absence of such refusal, the assessee was entitled to assume that the time sought had in fact been granted. No question of law requiring our consideration arises in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Susainathan and anr. Vs. T. Vijayan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-2001
Reported in: (2001)3MLJ396
ORDERPrabha Sridevan, J.1. These revisions arise out of an order passed under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The landlords are the petitioners in both the revisions. One Adaikala Mary was the landlady who filed the application and the petitioners were brought on record as her legal representatives pending C.R.P. Since the 1st petitioner died, the 2nd petitioner his son was recognised as the 1st petitioner's legal representative for the purpose of prosecuting the revisions.2. Adaikala Mary, the landlady filed R.C.O.P. No. 603 of 1993 for fixing the fair rent. According to her, the fair rent per month was Rs. 2,954. The Rent Controller fixed the fair rent at Rs. 1,774. Against this, the tenant filed R.C.A. No. 274 of 1995 and the landlords filed R.C.A. No. 311 of 1995. The appellate Authority allowed the tenant's appeal and dismissed the landlords appeal by fixing the fair rent at Rs. 1,374 per month. Against this, ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Cegat
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(133)ELT542(Mad)
ORDERR. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. The respondent, though served, has not chosen to appear in person, or through Counsel.2. Having heard Counsel for the Revenue, we are satisfied that a question requiring our consideration does arise.3. The Tribunal is directed to refer the following question of law :'Whether the assessee is entitled to Modvat credits on inputs received under the cover of gate passes endorsed after 1-4-94, despite the terms of the Notification No. 16/94 dated 30-3-1994 ?'2. The Tribunal is directed to submit a statement of the case together with the relevant materials for the purpose of deciding the question....
Tag this Judgment!Thirubuvanam Town Panchayat by Its Executive Officer Vs. Nabisa Bibi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-2001
Reported in: (2001)3MLJ473
A. Ramamurthi, J.1. The defendant in O.S.No. 406 of 1985 on the file of District Munsif Court, Valangaiman at Kumbakonam, has preferred the second appeal aggrieved against the Judgment and decree in A.S.No. 2 of 1989 on the file of Sub Court, Kumbakonam dated 4.10.1989 reversing the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 9.12.1988.2. The case in brief is as follows: The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that the assessment made by the defendant Panchayat is arbitrary and contrary to the Rules with consequential relief of permanent injunction. The plaintiff had purchased a vacant site measuring 2000 Sq.ft. in S.No. 79/6. Thirubuvanam Jamath Authorities formed layouts and the house sites were sold to different persons. The plaintiff purchased two plots for a consideration of Rs. 5,000 on 18.1.1982. She wanted to put up a house in the property as she was not owning any other house. About 29 plots were sold by the owners, in which one or two constructions have been completed; bu...
Tag this Judgment!Viswanathan Vs. Ramakrishna Chettiar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-2001
Reported in: (2001)3MLJ322
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. The defendant in O.S.No.39 of 1983 on the file of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Pondicherry is the appellant.2. The respondent-plaintiff filed the said suit for specific performance directing the dependent to execute and register Partnership deed with the plaintiff as per the agreement dated 19.11.1978 and agreement letter dated 31.1.1980 in respect of the bus firm styled and named as A.V.S. Bus Service at Pondicherry. The learned Subordinate Judge while rejecting the relief for specific performance, directed the defendant to pay a sum of Rs. 60,000.00with proportionate interest thereon within a period of six months. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant has preferred the present appeal.3. The case of the plaintiff as set out in the plant is briefly stated hereunder:He and the defendant have executed an agreement on 19.11.1978, whereby the defendant agreed to take the plaintiff as a shareholder of his contract carriage large omni bus firm. On that day,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »