Chennai Court March 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.
St.Thomas Mount Babies Home Holy Apostles Convent Rep. by Its Secretar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-2006
Reported in: (2006)3MLJ222
ORDERS. Rajeswaran, J. 1. This Revision Petition is against the order dated 28.12.2005 passed in Ad.O.P.No. 617/2005 on the file of the IV Additional City Civil Court, Madras dismissing the petition filed under Section 9(4) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (hereinafter called 'the Act') seeking permission to give in adoption of minor child Sahana alias Indhu to the adoptive parents G. Ranganathan and R. Ananthi. 2. The petitioner is the Foster Care Unit and one of the institutions of the Society of the Holy Apostles Convent St. Thomas Mount, Chennai.16. It was founded for the very purpose of looking after destitute and abandoned children and provide them with a Home and residential accommodation and also looks after the abandoned children with love and care. The Home is recognised by the Ministry of Social Welfare, Government of India under certificate No. 3/2004, dated 2.6.2004. One of the main tasks of the petitioner institution is to find out foster parents in India ...
N. Balakrishnan Vs. the Management Pandiyan Roadways Corporation Ltd. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ180
P. Sathasivam, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge dated 08.10.1999 made in Writ Petition No. 1485 of 1990, N. Balakrishnan, second respondent therein has filed the above writ appeal.2. For convenience, we shall refer the parties as arrayed in the writ petition.3. The appellant herein is the second respondent in the writ petition. He was employed as a Helper in the petitioner Management/Transport Corporation at Kumuli Depot. According to the Management, on 03.1 1.1985, he went to the depot at midnight and after receiving the bonus amount due to him from the cashier, he slept in the officer room. After the cashier left the room, he opened the room with the keys and then opened the iron safe and removed Rs. 37,086.05 and left the premises. A criminal complaint was lodged against the second respondent. The criminal case was taken as Case No. 75 of 1986. On the basis of the report, a charge memo was issued to the second respondent on 1 3.11.1985. He was charged for havi...
Gangetic Commercial (India) Rep. by Its Proprietrix Mrs. Maya Devi Gup ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ509
ORDERR. Sudhakar, J.1. The writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the third respondent dated - July 1997. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a proprietary firm owned by Maya Devi Gupta. Originally, it was a partnership firm of the year 1977 and the two partners were Pradeep Gupta and Maya Devi Gupta. In 1983, the business was closed and E.B. connection disconnected. In 1992, the machineries were sold and on 22.3.1993, the partnership was dissolved. The industrial shed was leased out to M/s.Adarsh Alloys and Castings (Madras) Pvt. Ltd., Chennai, by a deed of lease dated 12.2.1993. The petitioner's industrial shed was allotted Service Connection No. 35-02-843. The electricity consumption dues payable by the industrial unit were being paid regularly and there was no arrears. It is the case of the petitioner that there was another company, by name M/s.Gangetic Steel Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., Arapakkam Village, North Arcot District and the said Pradeep Gup...
Tmt. Kalachi @ Rajalakshmi Vs. State by the Deputy Superintendent of P ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2053
ORDERM. Jeyapaul, J.1. As against the order of dismissal passed in Crl.M.P.No.51 of 2006 filed under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Crl.R.C.No.191 of 2006 has been preferred before the learned Special Judge No. 1/X Additional Judge, Chennai.2. As against the order of dismissal passed in Crl.M.P.No.52 of 2006 filed under Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Crl.R.C.No.192 of 2006 has been preferred before the learned Special Judge No. 1/X Additional Judge, Chennai.3. As against the order of dismissal passed in Crl.M.P.No.53 of 2006 filed under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Crl.R.C.No.193 of 2006 has been preferred before the learned Special Judge No. 1/X Additional Judge, Chennai.4. The petitioner has been arraigned as third accused in a case under Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code r/w Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ...
E. Natarajan Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Commissioner and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ165
ORDERN. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner seeks to quash the order of the third respondent dated 6.2.2004 and reinstate him in service in anyone of the suitable post with arrears of salary and other benefits.2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are as follows.(a) Petitioner was working as Havildar Jeep Driver at the Office of the Commandant, VIII Battallion, Veerapuram, Chennai-55. On 19.1.1994, at 18.10 hours, while the petitioner was discharging his duties, one hand pistol belonging to the Commandant was left behind the driver's seat of the Jeep and one Arulnathan took the same to be handed over to Gandhirajan, I.P.S. Petitioner was standing near one Shanmugam, HIV (No.820). The hand pistol accidentally got triggered by Arulnathan, which resulted in multiple injuries to the petitioner and he became unconscious. Petitioner was rushed to the General Hospital for treatment and he was treated there as inpatient from 19.1.1994 to 24.1.199...
Subburaya Gounder Vs. Balakrishnan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Mad301
S.K. Krishnan, J.1. The appellant herein is the plaintiff. He filed a suit in O.S. No. 71 of 1999 before the Additional District Munsif, Cuddalore for the relief of declaration and recovery of possession of the suit property. The suit property is situated at Kondur Village, Cuddalore registered district. The survey number is 77. The suit land measuring to the extent of 0. 26 V2 cents out of 0.53 cents. The said suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff and thereafter, the defendants preferred an appeal before the learned Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore and the same was allowed. As against the said order, the present second appeal has been filed by the plaintiff.2. The case of the appellant/plaintiff is as follows:He purchased the suit property on 6-6-1962 for a valid consideration from one Iyyakannu Pillai. At that time under him one Venkatakrishna Reddiar of Kondur was cultivating the said land as a lessee. Thereafter, the appellant/plaintiff came into possession and has been cultivati...
Rajappa Vs. Johny D' Couto
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)CTC838; (2006)2MLJ503
ORDERM. Jaichandren, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred against the order, dated 22.07.2003, passed in R.C.A. No. 688 of 2001 on the file of the VIII, Court of Small Causes at Madras, confirming the order of eviction, dated30.08.2001, passed in R.C.O.P. No. 2187 of 1999 on the file of the XII Court of Small Causes at Madras. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent.3. It is the case of the petitioner/tenant that the respondent/landlord had filed R.C.O.P. No. 2187 of 1999 before the Rent Controller for eviction on the ground of alleged 'Wilful default' in payment of rents for the period from April 1999 to September 1999. The learned Rent Controller had allowed the petition, by his order order, dated 30.08.2001. Against which, the petitioner herein had filed an appeal before the Rent Control Appellate Authority in R.C.A. No. 688 of 2001. The Rent Control Appellate Authority, by an order, dated 22.07.2003, had dismissed the appeal confirm...
Shanmuga Arts, Science, Technology and Research Academy (Sastra), Deem ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-21-2006
Reported in: (2009)5MLJ1554
ORDERD. Murugesan, J.1. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'UGC Act'), the Central Government, on the recommendation of the Commission, declared the petitioner Shanmugha, Arts, Science, Technology and Research Academy (SASTRA), Thanjavur as deemed to be University by notification dated 15.6.2001 with effect from 26.4.2001 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Deemed University'). Initially, Shanmugha College of Engineering was established in the year 1984 and was administered by one Balaseva Educational and Charitable Trust. The college was affiliated to Bharathidasan University and was approved by the All India Council for Technical Education. The college was offering courses like B.E., Civil, Mechanical, Electrical & Electronics & Communication, B.E., Information Technology, Information Technology & Management, M.E. and M.C.A. The college was accredited by the National Board of Accreditation. Th...
Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Limited Vs. the Joint Commissioner of I ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-21-2006
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(Mad)21; [2006]287ITR83(Mad)
P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J.1. The present appeals are filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at the instance of the assessee against the order passed in I.T.A. Nos. 319, 320 & 321(Mds)/2001 dated 23.11.2001 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench. These appeals came up before this Court and this Court admitted the appeals on 26.02.2003 and formulated the following substantial questions of law:-1. Whether a reserve created in the later years would be available for the utilisation even if purchases are made in the earlier years?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the acquisition of the ships M.V. TAMIL PERIYAR, M.V. TAMIL KAMARAJ and the Dredger cannot be held to have satisfied the requirement of Section 32A, and the withdrawal of investment allowance granted is justified? and3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in not considering the ac...
M.P.P. Nataraja Nadar by Accountable Person N. Deivendran Vs. the Cont ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-21-2006
Reported in: (2006)204CTR(Mad)478; [2006]286ITR384(Mad)
P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J.1. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, 'D' Bench, under the direction of this Court order in TCP No. 207 of 1993 dated 01.03.1999, referred the matter under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act at the instance of the assessee, for opinion of this Court, raising the following question of law:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 87,219/- being alleged share of the deceased in the goodwill of the firm of N.P.Nataraja Nadar and Sons passed on the death of the deceased?2.The facts leading to the above question of law are as under: One N.P.P.Nataraja Nadar passed away on 16.05.1981. During his life time, he was a partner in a firm called M/s.N.P.Ponnappa Nadar and Sons. The said firm was constituted on 18th June 1962 consisting of 4 Partners, including the deceased. The deceased had 25% share in the profit or loss of the firm. The firm was engaged in purchase and sale of textile and h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »