Chennai Court October 2003 Judgments
A.C. Kiruba Shankari Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its Secretary to ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: (2004)1MLJ580
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J. 1. By consent of both parties, writ petition itself is taken up for disposal.2. The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allot her one MBBS seat, reserved for the children of Ex-servicemen for the academic year 2003-2004.3. According to the father of the petitioner, who sworn to an affidavit in this writ petition, since the petitioner is a daughter of Ex-serviceman (Sergeant of Indian Air Force), applied for admission to MBBS course for the Session 2003-2004 under Group 1 Special Category. She belongs to B.C. category. She has secured total marks 293.81 out of 300. Though she is in the 15th rank under special category for children of Ex-servicemen, she was not selected. There are six seats reserved for children of Defence Personnel and it is categorised as two seats for children of Service Personnel Killed in action; two seats reserved to children of Ex-servicemen and two seats for the children of S...
Tag this Judgment!Villupuram Taluk Sc/St Taxi Owners-cum-drivers Association, Rep. by It ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: I(2004)BC487; 2004(1)CTLJ304(Mad); (2004)1MLJ128
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J.1. By a tender notification dated 10.7.1998, the respondent/Corporation invited tenders for hiring cars and jeeps imposing a condition that the participants in the tender should hold and possess the vehicles registered after the year 1997. However, the petitioners requested to relax the said condition contending that they could not purchase new vehicles, and it is under such circumstances the petitioners seek a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioners tender dated 7.8.1998 and the subsequent representation dated 20.8.1998, 25.8.1998 and 8.9.1998, wherein the petitioners requested the respondents to consider their tenders with respect to the vehicles which are registered prior to 1997.2. In my considered opinion, if the petitioners fail to qualify the conditions of tender, it may not be proper for this Court to direct the respondents to consider the request of the petitioners to relax the conditions of the tender itself, as the powers...
Tag this Judgment!Angathal and 2 ors. Vs. Ramasamy and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)CTC549
ORDERPrabha Sridevan, J.1. The first respondent filed O.S.No. 452 of 1986 for partition against his father Pacha Gounder who is now deceased and his mother and sisters who are the petitioners and the second respondent herein. The first defendant Pacha Gounder alone filed his written statement. In the written statement he denied the existence of the joint family. The third item suit property was stated to be his self-acquired property which he was entitled to deal with as he pleased. This written statement was filed on 2.1.1987 and adopted by the other defendants who are the petitioners and the second respondent herein. Pacha Gounder died pending suit and the plaintiff and the defendants being his legal representatives were recognized as such.2. On 19.3.1991, the suit was decreed in terms of the compromise deleting item No. 2 and declaring the right of the third petitioner and the first respondent to 6/15 share each in item No. 1 and item No. 3 and 1/15 share each to the petitioner Nos....
Tag this Judgment!M. Salem Vs. Josephine Mary
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: (2004)1MLJ76
ORDERPrabha Sridevan, J.1. The tenant has filed these revisions. Originally, the respondent filed for eviction on five grounds viz., wilfuldefault, sub-letting, acts of waste, change of user and denial of title. The respondent did not press the grounds of subletting and change of user. The Rent Controller granted eviction on the remaining three grounds viz., wilful default, acts of waste and denial of title. The Appellate Authority confirmed the order of eviction only on the ground of wilful default and denial of title. The arguments advanced by the counsel were only on the ground of wilful default, and acts of waste. 2. The quantum of rent itself is in dispute. According to the petitioner, the rent payable is Rs.1,500/-. According to the respondent, it is Rs.2,000/-. The period of default is from September 1997 to January, 1998. Admittedly, the respondent has received an advance of Rs.35,000/-. It is the case of the petitioner that originally, at the commencement of the tenancy, which...
Tag this Judgment!The Management of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam D ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: (2004)IILLJ207Mad
ORDERK.P. Sivasubramaniam, J.1. The above writ petition has been filed by the State Transport Corporation seeking to quash the award of the Labour Court, Cuddalore, dated 19.12.2000 in I.D.No.130 of 1992.2. The first respondent employee, in his claim statement before the Labour Court, contended that he was employed as driver bearing Staff No.3158 in Cholan Roadways Corporation, Kumbakonam. On 14.2.1984 when he was on duty in bus bearing registration No.TMN 4749 plying from Tiruchy to Tanjavur, the bus met with an accident due to the negligence of a Motorcyclist in which the cyclist died and the girl who was pillion rider sustained injuries. A criminal case was filed and after investigation charge-sheet was filed before the Criminal Court. Finally he was acquitted by the Criminal Court on 6.3.1986. However, even wile the Criminal case was pending, the management initiated parallel departmental proceedings. A charge memo was given to the petitioner on 21.2.1984 for which the petitioner f...
Tag this Judgment!Habibia Girls Primary School, (Rep. by Its Manager) Vs. Noorinisha (Ms ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR386]; (2004)IILLJ398Mad; (2004)1MLJ600
P.K. Misra, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed by the Habibia Girls Primary School, against the order passed by the appellate authority, under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, confirming the order of the original authority, directing that gratuity would be payable to respondents 1 to 6, by calculating on the basis of their initial appointment and not from the date, on which the school became recognised and aided.3. It is the contention of the petitioner that before the school was recognised and aided in the year 1989, Madras, being a charitable institution, was imparting discourses relating to Holy Quran to Poor Muslims and the school was established for the first time in the year 1989. This is a factual aspect, for which there is no material adduced before the original authority or the appellate authority.4. It is, of course, true that the original authority had decided the matter ex parte, as the petitioner had not appeared. Even bef...
Tag this Judgment!Vanavil Dyes and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Joint Secretary (Revision Applicat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2003(158)ELT432(Mad)
F.M. Ibrahim Lalifulla, J.1. Challenging the order of the first respondent in his order No. 147/96 dated 4.11.1996, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the first respondent to refund the sum of Rs 6, 84, 590/- being the claim of rebate of duty due in terms of order in appeal No. 133/94(M) dated 16.5.1994 of the third respondent.2. The petitioner is a public limited Company having its manufacturing unit and registered office at Kuldikadu, Sipcot Post, Cuddalore. It cleared a quantity of 2000 kilograms of Cresol Chloride on payment of excise duty of Rs. 5, 35, 500/- under GPI No. 20 dated 29.12.90 to its consignee called M/s . Colour Chem, Thane. Since M/s . Colour Chem was entitled for making MODVAT claim, it took credit of the excise duty paid by the petitioner in their RG 23A Part II account as an input. It is stated that subsequently M/s . Colour Chem, returned and resold the entire quantity of 2000 Kilograms of Cresol Chloride on 10.11.1992 and cleared the same by applying for n...
Tag this Judgment!Vanavil Dyes and Chemicals Ltd., Rep. by the Manager Commercial Operat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2003LC299(Madras)
ORDERF.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. Challenging the order of the first respondent in his order No. 147/96 dated 4.11.1996, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the first respondent to refund the sum of Rs. 6, 84 590/- being the claim of rebate of duty due in terms of order in appeal No. 133/94(M) dated 16.5.1994 of the third respondent.2. The petitioner is a public limited Company having its manufacturing unit and registered office at Kuldikadu, Sipcot Post, Cuddalore. It cleared a quantity of 2000 kilograms of Cresol Chloride on payment of excise duty of Rs. 5, 35, 500/-under GPI No. 20 dated 29.12.90 to its consignee called M/s .Colour Chem, Thane. Since M/s .Colour Chem was entitled for making MODVAT claim, it took credit of the excise duty paid by the petitioner in their RG 23A Part II account as an input. It is stated that subsequently M/s .Colour Chem, returned and resold the entire quantity of 2000 kilograms of Cresol Chloride on 10.11.1992 and cleared the same by applying for ...
Tag this Judgment!S. Noorjahan Vs. Sadhik Batcha,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Mad240
ORDERV.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. This is an unfortunate writ petition by one S. Noorjahan, wife of one Sadhik Batcha. The said Noorjahan is admittedly the wife of Sadhik Batcha. Sadhik Batcha is presently not in India. He has reportedly gone to Dubai. The case pleaded before us is that the first respondent was married to the petitioner on 14.11.1995, wherein some dowry was given and thereafter the said Sadhik Batcha, the first respondent went to foreign country. The petitioner claims that during the absence of her husband, she was tortured by her mother-in-law and brother-in-law for dowry and even after the first respondent returned back from the foreign country, the demand persisted and in pursuance of the same, she was turned out from the house and asked to bring Rs. 50, 000/-. When she failed to bring the amount from the parents' house, she was attacked by her husband and beaten, while the second respondent Zakir Hussain also beat her. She was therefore, required to go home and stay with h...
Tag this Judgment!Muthiah Vs. the Management of Seethalakshmi Mills Rep. by Its Managing ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)CTC310; (2004)IILLJ229Mad
ORDERD. Murugesan, J.1. The petitioner has questioned the award of the Special Industrial Tribunal, Madras dated 13.12.95 in dismissing the complaint made in Complaint No. 3 of 1994. 2. The petitioner joined the services of the first respondent-Management (hereinafter referred to as the 'Management') as a Sider in the Spinning Department on 13.2.84. Since he had to proceed to his relative's place at Vathalagundu urgently after the night shift was over on 16.9.93, the petitioner left to Vathlagundu on 17.9.93, where he fell sick. He therefore sent a telegram on 20.9.93 to the Management about his absence. On coming to know that he was implicated in a murder case, he surrendered before the Court on 27.9.93 and was kept in prison. On 11.10.93 the petitioner sent his requisition for leave from 17.9.93 till he was released from jail. He also sent another letter on 17.10.93. However, the Management refused to grant leave in their communication dated 22.11.93. A charge memo dated 6.12.93 was ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »