Chennai Court November 2005 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.
State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Secretary to Government Home Departmen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: (2006)1MLJ149
ORDERS.K. Krishnan, J.1. The writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, the second respondent herein, pertaining to the orders made in O.A. No. 4861 of 1996 dated 21/8/2001 and to quash the same. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioners had stated that the orders of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal dated 21/8/2001 in O.A. No. 4861/1999, wherein the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal had set aside the punishment of 'Removal from service' imposed on the first respondent, with directions to reinstate him in service with all service and monetary benefits. 3. The case of the petitioners is that the first respondent was working as Warder Grade-II in Prison Department attached to Sub-jail, Tindivanam from 1/9/1977. While he was serving as Warder Grade-II at Sub-jail, Tindivanam, he was entrusted to attend duty on 31/10/1984 , between 10.00 p.m. and 12....
D. Palavesamuthu Vs. the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Rep. by I ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-2005
Reported in: (2006)1MLJ143; (2006)3LLN461
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. Aggrieved by the Order of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai dated 10.01.2003 made in O.A. No. 2662 of 2001, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition to quash the same.2. According to the petitioner, he joined the service in AdiDravidar Welfare Department as Secondary Grade Teacher in the year 1965 and continued as such till 1992. Since he was stagnating in the post of Secondary Grade Teacher for 10 years and 20 years, he was awarded Selection Grade and Special Grade respectively on completion of the said period of service. In the month of July,1992 he was promoted as Headmaster of Elementary School run by the Adi-Dravidar Welfare Department. Thereafter, he was entitled to draw the scale of pay due to the Elementary School Headmaster. After 01.06.1988, the post of Elementary School Headmaster had been made as a promotional post. Prior to that date, the post of Elementary School Headmaster is equivalent to Secondary Grade Teacher. Though he ...
P. Ramasamy Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Its Secre ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-2005
Reported in: (2006)1MLJ146
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. The petitioner while working as Inspector of Police at Thiruthangal Police Station in 1991, based on the statement of some of the accused, the following three charges were framed against him under 3 (b) of Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 1955. They are:'i) Dereliction of duty in having failed to register a case against Jothi, S/o Govinda Thevar of Gankakulam on 22-11-1991 for his involvement in the counterfeit currency case and kept him in illegal custody at Thiruthangal Police Station on the night of 22-11-1991 for extracting illegal gratification;ii) Reprehensible conduct in having released Jothi on 23-11-1991 without registering a case against him under Section 489(C) I.P.C. after getting a bribe of Rs. 20,000/- through Devaraj S/o Muthiah Thevar concerned in Thiruthangal P.S Crime No. 446/91 under Section 489(C) I.P.C.,;iii) Reprehensible conduct in aiding and abetting the offence of concealing the counterfeit currency...
Prasad Naidu and Mohamed Hanif Vs. Mrs. Padmini Jayasundar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-2005
Reported in: 2005(5)CTC660
ORDERA. Kulasekaran, J.1. This civil revision petition is listed today for admission and I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.2. The tenants are the revision petitioners. The respondent herein has filed RCOP No. 166 of 2003 for eviction against the petitioners herein on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent, unauthorised subletting and also for demolition and reconstruction. It is stated that as against three other tenants, who were residing in the same premises, RCOP Nos. 1534 to 1536 of 2002 have been filed by the respondent herein more or less on the same ground and all the four Petitions were allowed by the learned Rent Controller on the only ground of demolition and reconstruction by a common order dated 18-12-2003 and eviction was ordered. 3. It is stated that out of the four tenants, only three tenants, inclusive of the petitioners herein, have preferred Rent Control Appeals in which RCA No. 1455 of 2004 was posted before the learned VIII Judge, Court of Sma...
P.V. Thambidurai Vs. K. Paramasivan and the Returning Officer, Block D ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: (2005)4MLJ689
ORDERA. Kulasekaran, J.1. The first respondent in El.OP No. 171 of 2001 on the file of the I Additional District Court, Coimbatore, who is the successful candidate, is the revision petitioner. The first respondent herein, who is the nearest unsuccessful candidate has filed the above said Election Petition to call for the records namely the entire ballot papers, polled and unpolled, valid and invalid, in respect of the election for the post of President of R. Ponnapuram Panchayat and other connected records pertaining to the conduct of election and to declare that the first respondent herein is duly elected President of the said Panchayat in the election held on 16-10-2001 by declaring the election of the revision petitioner herein as President of R. Ponnapuram Panchayat as void and for other reliefs. In the said election petition, the first respondent herein has filed I.A. No. 61 of 2002 under Section 130 of Tamil Nadu Panchayat Rules, 1995 to send for the ballot papers and connected r...
B. Ramalingam, Formerly Iii Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chenna ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)CTC577; (2006)1MLJ75
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. B. Ramalingam, formerly III Additional Judge, city Civil court, Chennai, now functioning as Additional District Judge-cum-Presiding officer, Special court, constituted under E.C. Act, Salem, is now facing the charge of contempt in the suo motu contempt proceedings initiated by this Division Bench.2. The circumstances under which the above proceedings were initiated against the Judicial Officer, in brief, are as follows:'(a) D. Geetha filed a suit in O.S.No. 6155 of 2001 before the XV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai for declaration and injunction in respect of the suit property against her own mother D. Thulasi Ammal.(b) D. Thulasi Ammal, the mother also filed a suit against her daughter D. Geetha in O.S.No. 5798 of 2002 for the relief of injunction in respect of the same suit property.(c) During the pendency of these suits, both filed separate applications for interim injunction. The learned trial Judge granted interim injunction in favour of t...
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Rep. by Its Chief Personnel Manager ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: (2006)ILLJ938Mad; (2005)4MLJ685
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. Nagendra, respondent herein, was appointed as a Heavy Vehicle Driver by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., appellant herein, by an order dated 21.07.1989, as a probationer. By Anr. order dated 17.08.1990, his services were terminated after the probation period was over. Aggrieved by that order of termination, in not confirming his appointment, he filed a writ petition, seeking for quashing of the said order. A learned single Judge allowed the Writ Petition, quashing the order and directing the appellant to appoint the respondent as a fresh candidate in the circumstances of the case. Challenging the same, the appellant has filed this appeal.2. The facts would be summarised as follows :'(a) D.Nagendra, respondent, joined the appellant Corporation on 01.08.1989 as a Heavy Vehicle Driver. He was on probation for a period of 12 months. The period of probation was completed on 31.07.1990. On 17.08.1990, an order of termination was served on him, terminating his serv...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hari Vignesh Motors (P) Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-11-2005
Reported in: [2006]282ITR338(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J. 1. The above tax case appeal is directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in 1314/Mds/2001 dated 17.5.2005 for the assessment year 1997-98.2. The Revenue is the appellant. The assessee is a dealer in two wheelers manufactured by TVS Suzuki Limited and was doing business in lease-hold premises. During the relevant period, the assessee constructed a ground floor over the existing basement floor at a cost of Rs. 4,82,688/-, according to the specifications given by TVS Suzuki Limited to all its dealers. The assessee claimed the said sum as revenue expenditure. The assessing officer disallowed the said claim as not relating to business, inasmuch as a new permanent capital asset has been brought into existence and added to the income. Against that order, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), who deleted the additions and held the issue in favour of the assessee, which was confirmed by the Income-tax Appellate Tr...
R. Somasundaram and ors. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Commissio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: (2006)1MLJ89
F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. This writ appeal arises under the Land Acquisition Act.2. The challenge in the writ petition was to the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act dated 9.8.1978 and Section 6 declaration dated 23.12.1981.3. The writ petition came to be dismissed solely on the ground of delay and laches because after the 4(1) notification and 6 declaration, the award came to be made in Award No.7 of 1986. Pursuant to the said award, possession was also taken over by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board as early as on 30.10.1986. Thereafter, it is stated that the Tamil Nadu Housing Board handed over the lands to Chennai Metro Water Supply and Sewerage Board on 17.5.1994. The appellants, who slept over the matter, suddenly woke up in the year 1996 and came forward with the abovesaid writ petition contending that though the name of the writ petitioner Tmt. Rajeswari was specifically mentioned in Section 6 declaration, the appellants were not issued with necessa...
Commissioner of Income-tax-vi Vs. P.V. Bhoopathy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: (2006)205CTR(Mad)495; [2006]283ITR365(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The above tax case appeals are directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA. No. 821/Mds/2000, 822/Mds/2000, 823/Mds/2000 and 824/Mds/2000 dated 12.8.2004.2. The Revenue is the appellant. The assessment years involved in the present appeals are 1993-1994, 1994-1995, 1995-1996 and 1996-1997 respectively.3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-(i) The assessee is an individual and he filed income tax returns for the assessment years in question, within the time allowed under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee filed revised returns for the assessment years 1989-1990 to 1997-1998 on 6.10.1997. In the revised returns, the assessee disclosed agricultural income for the first time. The assessing officer did not accept the agricultural income declared in the revised returns as genuine and treated the same as an income from other sources. The assessing officer, after scrutinising the details furnished by the assessee, worked ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »