Chennai Court March 2002 Judgments
Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd., Tuticorin, Represented by Its Chirman, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: (2002)2MLJ437
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J. 1. Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited, Tuticorin and their Chairman S. Krishnamurthy, questioning the filing of Civil Suit in O.S.No.419 of 2001 pending on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tuticorin, have preferred C.R.P.No. 4203/2001 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. In C.R.P.No. 11 of 2002, S. Krishnamurthy, Chairman, Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited challenges the filing of complaint in unnumbered C.C.No. /2001 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, No.II, Tuticorin and prays for quashing of the same. 3. The case of the petitioner in C.R.P.No. 4203/2001 is as follows:- The first petitioner is a banking company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The company is governed in its functioning by the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and is a Board Managed Banking Company. The first respondent herein filed the said suit (O.S.No. 419/2001) on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Thoothukkudi to declare the withdraw...
Tag this Judgment!R. Baskar Bhat Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Mad330; (2002)2MLJ214
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. Heard both sides.2. The appellant is the unsuccessful plaintiff in C.S.No.409 of 1997 laid for a judgment and decree to direct the defendant/respondent herein to (i) deliver possession of the suit properties viz., schedule A, B & C of the plaint; (ii) to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- as damages for wrongful usage and occupation from 3.6.1997 to 8.7.1997 at the rate of Rs.1000/- per day; and (iii) to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- per day for wrongful usage and occupation of the suit properties from the date of plaint till date of delivery of possession.3. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are arrayed as per their rank in the suit.4.1. Admittedly, the land located at old No.24, present No.96, Poonamallee High Road, Madras, originally belonged to one A.T.Kathiresan and the same was leased out by A.T.Kathiresan to the defendant - Corporation for a period of 10 years from 1.7.1954 to 30.6.1964 for a monthly rent of Rs.200/- per month, then renewed from 1.7.1964 to 30.6.19...
Tag this Judgment!Steel Plant Employees Union, Salem, Represented by Its General Secreta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: (2003)ILLJ189Mad; (2002)2MLJ271
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. By consent of all the parties main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. The petitioners are various Employees Unions of Salem Steel Plant. Aggrieved by the 'SAIL Scheme for leasing of houses to employees - 2001', read with Circular bearing ref. No. TA-21(1) dated 28-12-2001 issued by the third respondent, eight Employees Unions have filed the above writ petition to quash the same and for direction to the respondents to continue to allot the houses/flats at Salem Steel Plant Township to the employees of the Salem Steel Plant on subsidised rental as per the existing housing policy.2. The case of the petitioners Unions is briefly stated hereunder: The first respondent-Steel Authority of India is a Central Public Sector Undertaking and conglomerate of several steel plants all over the country, one of such is the Salem Steel Plant, the second respondent herein, which is located near the Salem Town in Tamilnadu. There are about 1250 workmen employed in the ...
Tag this Judgment!The Immaculate Heart of Mary Society, Mayiladuthurai rep. by Its Secre ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: (2002)2MLJ614
ORDERA. Muthukumar, J. 1. The landlord is the revision petitioner. The revision petitioner filed R.C.O.P for eviction of the respondents.2. The case of the petitioner/landlord is as follows:- The petitioner/Society is a registered society. The petitioner society is a social organisation constituted by Catholic Christians and the object of the institution is to promote education and medical aid. As per Rule 7 of the Regulations, the Secretary of the Society is empowered to sue and be sued on behalf of the society. The petitioner society is the owner of the petition mentioned premises. The premises was purchased by the society on 22.10.81. Even before the said purchase, one Muthukrishnan was the tenant in respect of the petition mentioned premises and he was running a cycle mart and subsequently attorned to pay the rent to the petitioner. The monthly rent is Rs.210/-. The said Muthukrishnan has not paid the rent regularly and he has committed wilful default in the payment of rent. Hence,...
Tag this Judgment!N. Subbanan Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd., Represented by It ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: [2002]112CompCas247(Mad)
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. Petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to settle all claims preferred against the Videsh Yatra Mitra Policy bearing policy No. 759562/2000, Category B and H, Plan G, DO Code: 171300, Co. Code 1, purchased by the petitioner on 6-2-2001 from the office of the second respondent, with regard to the petitioner's heart treatment undergone by him in the United States of America during the petitioner's visit there during the months from February to August, 2001, by not giving effect to the miscellaneous endorsement No. 171300/46/43/21/03/0003/2001 dated 12-2-2001 and the said endorsement is invalid, null and void and not binding on the petitioner and also that it cannot be enforced or given effect to, and that the petitioner is entitled to all the benefits of the above said policy as regards his heart treatment in United States of America.2. The case of the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder:-The petition...
Tag this Judgment!Sreedharan, Vs. Union of India (Uoi), by Chief Secretary and Collector ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: (2002)2MLJ370
A.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J.1. Plaintiffs 2 to 9 in O.S.93 of 1983 on the file of First Additional Sub Judge, Pondicherry are the appellants. Plaintiffs filed the above suit against the respondents herein praying the Court to declare that they are absolute owners of the suit property in question and further direct the first defendant authority by way of mandatory injunction to correct the revenue, settlement and commune Panchayat records to incorporate the factum of ownership of the plaintiffs.2. Briefly it is the case of the plaintiffs that plaint schedule property (a dry land comprised in Cadastre No.1251 to an extent of 1 Hectare 29 Ares 60 Centiares i.e., 2 Kanies 42 Kuzhies and situated in Thavalakuppam in Ariyankuppam Commune - 4 boundaries also given) originally belonged to erstwhile Government of France in settlement of Pondicherry represented by the then Governor. By virtue of a deed of assignment of title dated 20.10.1952 and registered on 22.10.1952, first plaintiff got titl...
Tag this Judgment!General Secretary, Kovai Mavatta Poriyiyal Pothu Thozhilalar Sangam (A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: (2002)IIILLJ450Mad
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. Both the writ petitions are admitted.2. Sri R. Chandrasekaran, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the first respondent and Sri Sanjay Mohan learned counsel takes notice for the second respondent in both the writ petitions.3. The prayers in the two writ petitions are common and it is enough to notice the prayer in W.P. No. 10304 of 2002 for the disposal of both the writ petitions. The prayer in Writ Petition No. 10304 of 2002 is to direct the first respondent, viz., the State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary, Labour and Employment, Chennai, to refer the issue relating to the closure of the Machinery Division of the second respondent, viz., Textool Company Ltd., Ganapathy, Coimbatore, for adjudication and pending' award by the Industrial Tribunal to forbear the second respondent from giving effect to the closure with effect from March 31, 2002.4. I heard Sri N.G.R. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P. No. 10304 of 2002 and Sri...
Tag this Judgment!Sumanth Pathak Vs. Tvs Suzuki Ltd., Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu, Rep. by It ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: (2002)2MLJ482
ORDERM. Chockalingam, J.1. What is challenged herein is the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Hosur, dismissing an application filed by the petitioner herein to stay further proceedings in O.S.No.172 of 2000 till the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.824/2000 on the file of the City Civil Court, Kanpur.2. As could be seen from the available materials, it was a suit filed by the first respondent herein against the petitioner and the second respondent for declaration, permanent injunction and damages. The petitioner herein filed a suit in O.S.No.824 of 2000 on the file of the City Civil Court, Kanpur against the respondents herein for declaration and permanent injunction. During the pendency of the suit in O.S.No.172 of 2000, the petitioner/first defendant filed the instant application for stay of the proceedings till the disposal of the suit filed by him in O.S.No.824/2000. On contest, the lower court dismissed the application, which has culminated in this revision.3. The learned Sen...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Leyland Limited, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai Vs. the Assistant ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: [2002]127STC73(Mad)
ORDERK. Raviraja Pandian, J. 1. The above two writ petitions are filed seeking for the relief of issuance of a writ of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the Order of the 2nd respondent - Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal dated 23.12.1998 made in O.P.Nos.1552 and 1321 of 1997 confirming the proceedings of the 1st respondent - the Assistant Commissioner (C T), Central Assessment Circle- III, Chennai dated 10.4.1997 in TNGST/15209/93-94 and the proceedings dated 21.3.1997 in TNGST/15209/91-92 whereby a sum of Rs.10,95,000/- and Rs.9,11,040/- have been imposed on the petitioner as interest under Section 24(3) of the T.N.G.S.T. Act for the belated payment of tax for the said two assessment years and quash the same. 2. In order to comprehend the point to be resolved in this case, the following facts are to be stated:The petitioner, an incorporated company under the Companies Act is an assessee on the file of the first respondent. The petitioner received in...
Tag this Judgment!Nagammal Vs. Boomi and Sundaram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-26-2002
Reported in: (2002)2MLJ463
ORDER1. The landlady is the revision petitioner. The landlady, who succeeded before the Rent Controller, but lost before the Appellate Authority, has filed this revision petition.2. The case of the petitioner in the R.C.O.P is as follows:-The petition mentioned property belongs to the petitioner. Santhanam Pillai, the father of the respondents, became a tenant under the petitioner on a monthly rent of Rs.12/-. After the death of Santhanam Pillai, his sons, the respondents, are residing in the petition mentioned property. The respondents were irregular in the payment of rent. The respondent have paid the rent up to Chittirai Rathakshi year. From Vaikasi, the respondents have not paid the rent and have committed wilful default in the payment of rent. The respondents have defaulted to pay ten months rent i.e., Rs.120/-. The petitioner issued a notice to the second respondent on 25.1.85 and the same was returned. Therefore, this petition is filed under Section 10(2)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Bu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »