Chennai Court February 2003 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.
Ramalingam Vs. State Represented by Station House Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)CTC599
ORDERA. Packiaraj, J.1. On being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Pondicherry, dated 30.11.1999, confirming the judgment passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pondicherry in STR. No. 578/93 dated 17.2.98, sentencing the petitioner herein to undergo imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment, for an offence under Section 182 IPC, the present revision has been preferred.2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that Ramalingam, the respondent herein lodged a First Information Report with the Inspector of Police PCR Cell on 15.12.1993 at about 5.00 p.m stating that one Sekar and Radhakrishnan abused him by using his caste name which attracted the provisions of the Protection of Civil Rights Act. The matter was investigated and found to be false. On coming to know that the complaint given by the said Ramalingam is false, the Inspector of Police, PCR ...
The Special Tahsildar (La), Adi Dravidar Welfare Vs. Parimala,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: (2003)1MLJ553
A.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J.1. To provide house sites for the Adi-Dravidas, the lands including those that are the subject matters of the above appeals, which are located in Sanankuppam Village and within the limits of Ambur Municipality, were acquired by the State of Tamil Nadu. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was duly published on 02.04.1993. The details with regard to the Survey Number and the extent in respect of the lands acquired under each of the above Appeals are as under :-A.S. No. 135 of 2000 is filed against LAOP No. 8 of 1997. The extent acquired is 1.02 acres in T.S. No. 5/8 and 0.04 acres in T.S No. 5/10A, totaling an extent of 1.06 acres. A.S. No. 136 of 2000 is filed against LAOP No. 10 of 1997. The extent acquired is 39 cents comprised in T.S. No. 6/5. A.S. No. 137 of 2000 is filed against LAOP No. 9 of 1997. The extent acquired is 0.80 acres comprised in T.S. No. 6/3 and 0.40 acres in T.S. No. 6/4, totaling 1.20 acres. A.S. No. 138 of 2000 ...
Western Exports India (P) Ltd., Rep. by Its Managing Director, Mr. Jay ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: [2003]117CompCas319(Mad)
ORDERE. Padmanahan, J.1. Writ Petition No:18100 of 2000 is filed by Sujatha Jayakar alias P. Sujatha praying this court to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records on the file of the 2nd and the 3rd respondents relating to the publication of the impugned auction notification issued by the 3rd respondent and published in 'The Hindu' dated 19.10.2000 proposing to auction on 20.11.2000 the petitioner's property situated at Old No. 31 2nd street, New No. 42, Third Street, East Abiraamapuram, Mulapore, Chennai-4 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to act as per the directions and guidelines issued by the Reserve bank of India in the Circular dated 27.7.2000 bearing Ref.BP.BC11/21-01-040/99-00 in so far as the settlement of the alleged amounts due by the 4th respondent is concerned and pass such further or other orders as this court may deem fit.2. Writ Petition No:21744 of 2000 is filed by the petitioner M/s. Western Exports (India) Private L...
Thanickachalam and Mrs. Virthabai Vs. State, by the Sub Inspector of P ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2666
ORDERV. Kanagaraj, J.1. The above Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to call for the records in C.C. No. 8431 of 2002 on the file of the Court of XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet and quash the same.2. The petitioners, who are the husband and wife and respectively aged 76 and 68 years, are the accused before the Court below in the said criminal case, which was registered on the complaint lodged by one Dr. A.G. Manimekalai for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 405 and 383 r/w. 384 IPC.3. The allegations against the petitioners are that during the year 1988-89, the informant Dr. A.G. Manimekalai purchased a house property at Door No. 28, Krishna Street, T. Nagar, Chennai-17 through the first petitioner, who is a broker, and in order to settle the full amount for the purchased property, the first petitioner induced the informant to obtain a sum of Rs.3,50,000/= from him after obtaining the original title deed ...
Ashok Leyland Limited Vs. the Presiding Officer, Second Addl. Labour C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: (2003)IILLJ1047Mad
ORDERK.P. Sivasubramaniam, J.1. Both the above writ petitions arise out of the order of the Labour Court, Madras in I.D. No. 83 of 1986 dated 21.12.1993, one filed by the management and the other by the employee.2. The employee joined the service of the company as an apprentice/machinist and at the time of dismissal from service, he was working as a checker in the stores of the management. According to him, his duties were to receive the materials from the suppliers, count them and keep them in the respective places in the open yard and sign the delivery challans. According to the management, he came to adverse notice of an alleged fraudulent act and he was issued with a charge sheet dated 6.9.1984 alleging as follows:-'It is reported that on 29.8.1984, you had fraudulently acknowledged a delivery challan No. R.S.148, purporting to have received 107 Nos. of Axle Arm Forgings to Part S 3236111 whereas not even an Axle Arm Forging under the above Delivery Challan was received in the Fact...
P. Ochu Vs. Mrs. Selsa,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-2003
Reported in: IV(2004)BC471
ORDERV. Kanagaraj, J.1. The above criminal original petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to set aside the order dated 11.9.2001 made in M.C. No. 9 of 2001 by the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate, Usilampatti as confirmed by the order dated 1.10.2002 made in Criminal revision petition No. 78 of 2001 by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. III), Madurai.2. On a perusal of the materials placed on record and upon hearing the learned counsel for both, it comes to be known that the petitioner herein is the husband of the first respondent and father of the minor respondents 2 and 3; that the respondents herein filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate, Usilampatti as against the petitioner herein for maintenance and the said Court having conducted a thorough enquiry into the matter, wherein on behalf of the respondents herein two witnesses were examined as P.Ws.1 a...
A.M. Basheer Ahmed Vs. the Director, Vector Control Research Centre (V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2003
Reported in: (2003)2MLJ23
ORDERV.S. Sirpurkar, J. 1. Petitioner herein, who, at the relevant time, was working as a Lab Assistant in Vector Control Research Centre, Pondichery (in short VCRC), has come before us feeling aggrieved by the dismissal of his original application, O.A. No. 447 of 1999. The facts are slightly complicated.2. The petitioner joined his services in the year 1981 as a Lab Assistant. He continued to be in that post. There was an advertisement by way of a notification dated 23-4-1999 for the post of Lab Technician, which was a promotion post for the Lab Assistants also. At that time, fifty per cent of the posts of Lab Technician were supposed to be filled in by recruitment of candidates from the open market while the remaining posts were to be filled in by promotion. The petitioner did not wait for the selection committee to commence any exercise and straight away challenged the said notification dated 23-4-1999 vide O.A. No. 447 of 1999 on the sole ground that it was incumbent upon the auth...
V-can Network (P) Ltd., Represented by Its Chairman Cum Managing Direc ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2003
Reported in: II(2004)BC182; [2004]118CompCas280(Mad); 2003CriLJ3971
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. V-Can Network (Private) Limited, through its Chairman cum Managing Director, Saligramam, Chennai-93 has filed Writ Petition No. 2908/2003 to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents not to prevent the petitioner's company from carrying on their day-to-day business of selling their products and services under the multi-level marketing scheme by using their respective offices and network systems, in Chennai. 2. Five distributors of V-Can Network Private Limited have filed Writ Petition No. 4144/2003 seeking a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering with their business in selling the products of V-Can Network (P) Limited under their Multi-level Marketing Scheme by using their respective offices and Network Systems in Chennai. Since the issues raised in both the writ petitions are common, they are being disposed of by the following common order.3. The case of the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2908/2003 is briefly stated hereunder:...
Tindivanam Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Rep. by Its Special O ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2003
Reported in: (2003)IILLJ754Mad
ORDERE. Padmanabhan, J.1. The writ petitioner, a co-operative society, has prayed for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for and quash the proceedings of the first respondent, Deputy Commissioner of Labour and appellate authority under The Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act in TSE No. 21/99 dated 9.11.99 and quash the same.2. Heard Mr. K. Srinivasamurthy, learned counsel appearing for M/s. Row and Reddy for the petitioner, Ms. V. Velumani, learned Additional Government Pleader for the first respondent and Mr. Vinodkumar, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.3. The petitioner, is a co-operative society registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. According to the petitioner, the petitioner society appointed the 2nd respondent as Junior Clerk and the said appointment was made by the erstwhile Board in violation of Rule 149 of The Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 and in disregard of the rules. The procedure prescribed under by-law 6(1) of ...
Bhaskaran Vs. State, Represented by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)CTC552
M. Karpagavinayagam, J. 1. Bhaskaran, the accused, was convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Challenging the same, this appeal is filed.2. The facts, in brief, leading to conviction are as follows:-a) The accused Bhaskaran and the deceased Janaki are husband and wife. They have got three children. The first son is studying in college, the second son and the daughter are studying in school. The accused suspected that the deceased Janaki had illicit intimacy with PW.9 Joyi. Due to this, frequent quarrel ensued between them.b) On 20.6.1997 at about 9.15 am., the deceased Janaki was preparing breakfast in the kitchen. The first son had gone to college and the second son and daughter had gone to school. At that time, the accused came and questioned the deceased as to where she went and came back. She told that she went and tied the bull and then came back. The accused scolded her stating that she was telling lie. Then, there was a wordy quarrel ensued between them. He accused her...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »