Chennai Court November 2006 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.
A.P. Kuppusamy and ors. Vs. P. Kumarapalayam Municipality, Rep. by Its ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: (2007)1MLJ827
A. Kulasekaran, J.1. The plaintiffs, who lost their case before the Courts below, are the appellants herein. The plaintiffs have filed O.S. No. 833 of 1985 on the file of District Munsif, Tiruchengode for permanent injunction and the same was dismissed, against which, they have preferred an Appeal in A.S. No. 4 of 1995 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Sankagiri and the same was also dismissed. Hence the present second appeal.2. The case of the appellants is that their father viz., Perumalsami Chettiar purchased the suit property from Murugesan Chettiar and Arthanari Chettiar under Ex.A1 dated 16.11.1950. The said Perumalsami Chettiar died on 17.06.1982, which is evident under Ex.A2. Ex.A3 series are house tax receipts issued in the name of the appellants. Citing the above said documents, the appellants sought for permanent injunction against the respondent Municipality, who attempted to construct a toilet in a portion of the suit property.3. The case of the respondent is that under Ex...
Mr. K.J. Doraisamy Vs. the Assistant General Manager, State Bank of In ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: [2007]136CompCas568(Mad); 2006(5)CTC829; (2006)4MLJ1877; [2007]78SCL196(Mad)
ORDERV. Ramasubramanian, J.1. The question as to whether a Bank/Financial Institution, has the right to publish the photograph of the defaulting borrower in Newspapers, and if such publication offends Article 21 of the Constitution, falls for consideration in this writ petition.2. The petitioner borrowed a term loan of Rs. 6 lakhs from the State Bank of India on 15.5.2001. On the petitioner committing default in payment of the monthly instalments, the Bank issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, on 6.2.2006. Subsequently, the Bank also issued a notice dated 22.5.2006, threatening to recover the loan by enforcing the security and bringing it to sale by publishing the details of the properties as well as the photographs of the borrower and the surety in Tamil and English Newspapers.3. Contending that the publication of his photograph and the photograph of the surety would be violative of Ar...
W.S. Magdoom Mohamed and ors. Vs. the Assistant Revenue Officer, Corpo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: (2007)1MLJ50
K. Mohan Ram, J.1 The unsuccessful plaintiffs in O.S. No. 7653 of 1990 on the file of the IV-th Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai are the appellants in the above second appeal.2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.3. The brief facts of the case of the plaintiffs are as follows:The suit property belonging to the plaintiffs was assessed to property tax pursuant to the order of remand passed by the Taxation Appeals Committee and in accordance with the order dated 09.03.1982 passed in M.T.A. Nos. 14 and 15 of 1981 by the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai. The second defendant fixed the annual value of the suit property at Rs. 2,98,116/- and at Rs. 3,38,520/- for the first and second half years of 1977-78 respectively. The second defendant had clearly stated in the assessment order that the basis for assessment was the fair rent arrived at, as per the provisions contained in The Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) ...
P. Hema, Vs. M. Muthusamy, Administrator, Rps Benefit Fund Ltd. (In Li ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: [2007]139CompCas214(Mad); (2007)1MLJ450; [2008]81SCL525(Mad)
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. All these original side appeals arise out of a common order dated 22.3.06 passed by the learned Company Judge in Company Application No.1101/05 in C.P. Nos. 233 to 238 of 1999. By the said order, the learned Company Judge, while passing penal order against the respondents/appellants, also held that the application under Sections 542 and 543 of the Companies Act, 1956 preferred by the 'Administrator' is maintainable.2. The questions required to be determined in these appeals are:a)Whether the 'Administrator' appointed by the court to look into the affairs of the company in liquidation, during the pendency of the proceedings for liquidation, could move an application under Sections 542 and 543 of the Companies Act, 1956 ?b) Whether the learned Company Judge has jurisdiction under Section 542 of the Companies Act, 1956 to punish the guilty person for the criminal offence mentioned thereunder 3. The company in liquidation, namely, RPS Benefit Fund Ltd., (hereinafter...
M. Subramanian (Deceased), Vs. Ramaswamy and
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CTC493
A. Kulasekaran, J.1. The Plaintiff is the appellant in this second appeal, who has filed the suit in O.S. No. 1749 of 1985 on the file of District Munsif Court, Coimbatore for declaration and injunction, which was decreed as prayed for. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants/respondents herein have preferred A.S. No. 193 of 1991 before the Principal Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, which was allowed, setting aside the decree and judgment of the trial court, hence, the present second appeal.2. Heard both sides. The subject matter of the dispute is in respect of vacant land comprised in Ka.Sa. No. 369 and 370 to a total extent of 5 1/2 cents in Ramanathapuram Village, Coimbatore District. The appellants claim their title to the said land under Ex.A1, sale deed dated 30.09.1976 and the respondents herein claim their title under Ex.B1, sale deed dated 07.09.1978. Both the sale deeds were executed by one Arumugam in favour of the appellants as well as the respondents.3. The trial court decreed...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S. Ajit Kumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: [2008]300ITR152(Mad)
P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, 'B' Bench dated 28.04.2006 in I.T.(S.S.)A. No. 53/Mds/2005, raising the following substantial questions of law:1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the material found in the course of survey in the premises of the builder could not be used in the block assessment of the assessee?2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding only if evidence of cash payment to the builder had been found at the time of search, could the proof of the same found at the time of survey in the builder's premises be used, inspite of the fact that other details of employing that particular builder were found at the time of search?2. The brief facts leading to the above questions of law are as under:The assessee is a Cine Actor. The office...
The General Manager, Northern Railway Vs. the Metal Powder Company Lim ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: (2007)1MLJ769
ORDERK. Venkataraman, J.1. The present Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order of the learned Principal District Munsif, Madurai Town dated 16.11.2004 made in I.A. No. 54 of 2003 in O.S. No. 1477 of 1996.2. The first respondent herein has filed the suit in O.S. No. 1477 of 1996 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Madurai Town against the petitioner and the second respondent for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner herein from enforcing the bank guarantee dated 12.4.1988 and restraining the second respondent herein from making payment of the amount covered by the bank guarantee dated 12.4.1988 to the petitioner herein and for costs. In the said suit, the petitioner, who was the first defendant, has filed an application inI.A. No. 54 of 2003 under Section 8(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The case of the petitioner is that the agreement between the petitioner and the first respondent herei...
The Harur Co-operative Primary Agricultural and Rural Development Bank ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: (2007)1MLJ299
ORDERS. Ashok Kumar, J.1. Defendants 5 and 6 in the suit are the revision petitioners before this Court.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:Plaintiffs 1 and 2 are minor children of the second defendant and plaintiffs 3 and 4 are minor children of the third defendant. Defendants 1 to 4 have borrowed a sum of Rs. 7,57,500/- from the petitioner bank (fifth defendant) by mortgaging the properties dated 29.01.1997.They failed to repay the money. Therefore, act in was contemplated under Section 120 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to recover the money under the Revenue Recovery Act. 3. The plaintiffs who are minor children of defendants 2 and 3, have filed a suit in O.S. No. 301 of 2003 before the learned District Munsif, Karur for declaration of their title to the suit properties and to grant permanent injunction against defendants 5 and 6 from attaching and selling the suit properties in R.R.A. No. 989 of 2000 of the 5th defendan...
The Regional Director E.S.i. Corporation Vs. Domore Tools and Accessor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: [2007(114)FLR462]; (2007)1MLJ734
V. Dhanapalan, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal preferred by E.S.I. Corporation arises out of the judgment and decree dated 25.11.1996 passed by the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Madras (in short 'the Tribunal) in E.S.I.P. No. 68 of 1997 in and by which the petition filed by the first respondent herein was allowed.2. The first respondent herein (in short 'the Company) filed a petition under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, (in short 'the ESI Act') before the Tribunal to set aside the orders dated 16.12.1983, 19.06.1986 and 25.08.1986 passed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (in short 'the Corporation') under Section 45A of the ESI Act and also to declare that the Company is not liable to pay any further contribution or interest except the short payment of Rs. 39/-.3. Before the Tribunal, the Company's case was that, formed in 1969, it functioned normally upto 1973 and in the middle of 1974, it became sick but was not wound up, keeping in mind...
Sharli Sunitha Vs. D. Balson
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2006
Reported in: (2007)1MLJ56
V. Dhanapalan, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 06.10.1997 passed by the District Court, Nilgiris (in short 'the Tribunal) in O.P. No. 40 of 1996.2. Sharli Sunitha who is the appellant herein filed a petition under Sections 7 to 10 and 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, before the Tribunal against her husband/respondent herein, seeking guardianship of their child by name Aldheeya.3. The case of the appellant in brief is as under:a. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent who belong to Christianity took place on 22.06.1991 and the appellant gave birth to a child named Aldheeya on 05.04.1992. In 1993, the appellant left her matrimonial home due to difference of opinion with the respondent and the respondent filed O.P. No. 13 of 1994 seeking guardianship of their child and on the basis of a memo to the effect that the respondent can meet the child every Sunday between 3 p.m. and 5 p.m. at Holy Velankanni Church, Kot...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »