Chennai Court September 2003 Judgments
A.S. Periasamy Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its Secretary, Social W ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)CTC406; (2004)1MLJ194
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.2. The petitioner has prayed for issuing a Writ of Certiorari to quash the proceedings in Roc. 12718/97(Y1) dated 22.12.1997 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act as well as for quashing the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act.3. The petitioner has challenged the validity of such notification on the ground that the provisions relating to issuance of notice, particularly, notice relating to enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act had not been complied with. It is also contended that the notification under Section 4(1) had not been published in accordance with law.4. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the District Gazette of Dharmapuri District on 30.12.1997. Subsequently, there was a publication in the newspaper and in the locality on 5.1.1998. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage is that the pub...
Tag this Judgment!Ace Investments Ltd., a Company Incorporated Under the Companies Act, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(Mad)486; [2003]264ITR571(Mad)
ORDERD. Murugesan, J.1. The issue put in before this Court is as to whether an application filed under Section 245C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is maintainable before the Settlement Commission only if it discloses income which has not been disclosed before the assessing officer. 2. Facts which give rise to the present writ petition are briefly stated as follows. The first petitioner company (hereinafter called the 'Company') viz., Ace Investments Limited is the cent percent holding company of Express Newspapers Limited, an incorporated company under the Companies Act, 1913 and an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. Express Newspapers Limited is the wholly owned subsidiary of the company. Fifty one percent shares of the company are held by Bhagwandas Goenka Educational Institution, which is a public limited company under the provisions of Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956. The company carries on business in finance and also deals in shares and securiti...
Tag this Judgment!The Dean, Agricultural College and Research Institute Vs. Tmt. S. Saki ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: (2004)ILLJ741Mad; (2003)3MLJ712
E. Padmanabhan, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Dean, Agricultural College and Research Institute challenging the award of compensation by the Commissioner of Workman Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour) Madurai in W.C. Case NO: 169 of 1994 ordered on 7.4.1995.2. Heard Mr. S.Jayaraman, learned counsel appearing for the appellant Mr. Umapathy for Mr. S.Silambannan for the first respondent and Mr. R.Parthipan, for the second respondent and Mr. N.Doraiswami for the third respondent. With the consent of counsel on either side the appeal itself is taken up for final disposal. For convenience, the parties will be referred as arrayed before the tribunal below.3. The dependent of late Sikkandar moved W.C.No: 169 of 1994 claiming a compensation of Rs. 87, 388/= against N.Mani, Contractor and the Dean, Government Agricultural College respectively being opposite parties 1 and 2. It is the appellant's case that the opposite party No. 1 engaged the deceased Sikkandar in the cons...
Tag this Judgment!Workmen of Balmadies Estate (rep. by Nilgris District Estate Workers' ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: (2004)IILLJ645Mad
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.1. Two workmen-Stephen and Nallusami were issued with chargesheets on December 15, 1980 wherein it was alleged that the Manager had received information that they had stolen 100 litres of gramoxine weedicide chemical belonging to the estate from the store room during the period between November 29, 1980 and December 2, 1980. The two employees replied to that notice stating that they had not committed any misconduct as alleged in the notice. Thereafter, an enquiry was held in which they participated till the evidence of M.Ws. 1 and 2 was recorded. They have also cross-examined those two witnesses.2. After cross-examination of M.W.2, Stephen, after stating that he would be found guilty anyway and that, he had no confidence in that enquiry, walked out of enquiry. Thereafter, Nallusami made a statement in which, he stated that on December 6, 1980 while he was doing work in the estate, workmen were all asked to meet the Manager and at that time, 'one lady identified me ...
Tag this Judgment!Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and ors. Vs. Aruppukottai Sri Jayavilas L ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Mad80; (2003)3MLJ754
ORDER OF THE BOARD)' 13.3 A closer reading of the above proceedings makes it clear that no distinction between the new industry or an expansion of existing Industry is made out for the purpose of granting exemption from levy of additional electricity tax. Therefore, the grant of exemption for the purpose of levy of additional electricity tax cannot automatically be relied upon to claim that 'B' unit of the Company is a new industry for the purpose of tariff concession also, as the claim of the Company that the 'B' unit is a new industry has to be satisfied by the Company, as contemplated in the notification made in G.O. Ms. No. 29, Energy (A2), dated 31-1-1995, referred to above.14. For the above reasons, the order of the learned single Judge dated 25-2-1999 made in W.P. No. 2389 of 1998 (reported in 1999 AIHC 3267) is set aside and the writ petition stands dismissed. However, without prejudice to the right of the company to approach the civil Court, if they are so advised.In the resul...
Tag this Judgment!Hotel Blue Star Through Its Partners S. Nambinarayanan and S. Sankaran ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)3MLJ666
ORDERV. Kanagaraj, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 26.8.1997 made in I.A. No. 1091 of 1996 in O.S. No. 771 of 1993 by the Court of Principal District Munsif, Tirunelveli thereby dismissing the said petition filed by the petitioners, who are the defendants to the suit to scrap the Commissioner's report already filed by the Advocate-Commissioner and appoint a new Commission to measure the property with the help of a qualified Surveyor and the District Surveyor and to submit a report.2. Today, when the above matter was taken up for consideration in the presence of the learned counsel for both, it comes to be known that the suit is one filed by the respondents herein praying for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from putting up any further construction in the Schedule II of the suit properties.3. While so, the defendants have filed an application earlier for the appointment of a Commission to inspect the suit locality, to measure the same wi...
Tag this Judgment!Management of Cmc Hospital Vs. Joint Commissioner of Labour, Appellate ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-25-2003
Reported in: (2004)IILLJ183Mad
F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. These writ petitions arise out of the order of the first respondent, dated January 2, 2001, in P.O. Appeals Nos. 27 of 1998 to 43 of 1998. The brief facts which led to the filing of the present writ petitions can be traced as under.2. There was a dispute as regards the non-employment of the third respondent in each of the writ petitions which came to be adjudicated by Justice Sri Natarajan, a retired Judge of the Supreme Court as a sole arbitrator. It is common ground that the non-employment arose some time in the year 1975. The learned arbitrator gave his award on March 23, 1994. In the said arbitration award, the learned arbitrator reached a conclusion that the non-employment of the 17 workmen was not justified. Thereafter, he granted the relief of compensation both towards back-wages, as well as, in lieu of reinstatement. Subsequently, based on the said arbitration award, the: concerned 17 workmen were stated to have preferred their respective applicatio...
Tag this Judgment!K.C. Palaniswamy, Chairman, Cheran Group Vs. the Appellate Authority f ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-25-2003
Reported in: [2004]118CompCas306(Mad); (2004)1CompLJ180(Mad); (2004)ILLJ338Mad; (2003)3MLJ718; [2004]54SCL345(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1. The workmen, about 1500 in number, employed by third respondent, Dhanalakshmi Mills Ltd., which owned two units, 'A' and 'B', 'A' mill being a spinning mill and 'B' mill being a weaving mill, have not been able to get any relief so far despite the order made by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction on 3.4.1998, directing sale of the lands owned by the sick company, the lands being valuable lands whose value based on the average of the estimated market value and guideline value is Rs. 2 crores per acres with a further direction that the money realised from such sale be applied to pay the wages and statutory dues as also the secured creditoRs. The closure of the 'B' Mill was permitted by an order of the Special Industrial Tribunal way back in the year 1994 with a further direction that the employees who were working in that mill be given employment in the A Mill. 1A. The effective denial of relief till date to the workmen for the las...
Tag this Judgment!L.Vijayalakshmi Vs. the Assistant Engineer, Maintenance and Operation, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)3MLJ748
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J.1. Since the petitioner is one of the Directors in M/s .Anbu Wattle Extracts Pvt. Ltd. , having High Tension Electricity Service Connection No. 34 under the respondent herein and also in arrears of payment of electricity consumption charges of the said service connection for a sum of Rs. 1, 12, 058/-, the other service connection of the petitioner, viz., S.C.No. 392 under the respondent is sought to be disconnected by the respondent in the impugned proceedings dated 19.12.2002. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner seeks a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in Ka.No. U/Po/AE/E O & M/C.Na.Pa./Ka/the disconnection/No. 549/2002 dated 19.12.2002 and to quash the same, on the ground that the respondent has no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order dated 19.12.2002.2. Placing reliance on Clause 19.18 of the Terms and Conditions of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Mr. N.Srinivasan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent, conten...
Tag this Judgment!P.R. Nallappa Vs. P.K. Srinivas and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: (2003)3MLJ711
ORDERV. Kanagaraj, J.1. Both the above civil revision petitions are filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying to set aside fair and decretal orders both dated 22.6.2000 respectively made in I.A. Nos. 484 and 488 of 1999 both in O.S. No. 101 of 1997 by the Court of Subordinate Judge, Hosur.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 has filed the suit in O.S. No. 101 of 1997 before the Court below for declaration, partition and permanent injunction as against the respondents 1 to 7 and when the said suit is pending, the petitioner has filed I.A. No. 484 of 1999 praying to implead respondents 8 to 10 in the first civil revision petition above as party defendants to the suit and I.A. No. 488 of 1999 praying to implead respondent No. 8 in the second civil revision petition above as party defendant to the suit. Since both the said petitions are dismissed by the Court bel...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »