Chennai Court May 2006 Judgments

Sahabudeen Vs. V. Haridass,

Court: Chennai

Reported in: I(2007)ACC124

V. Dhanapalan, J. 1. The injured claimant has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal questioning the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, I Additional District cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No. 5/1995 dated 25.03.1 997 in respect of the grievous injuries sustained by him in a motor accident that took place on 23.11.1994. The appellant/claimant herein prayed for a compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/-. In support of his claim, he himself was examined as P.W.1 and Dr. Deivangaperumal was examined as P.W.2, besides marking Exs.P1 to P5. On the side of the respondents, no oral and documentary evidence was let in. The Tribunal, after analysing the materials, held that the accident was caused due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle in question and passed an award for Rs. 1,00,000/- with 12% interest from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Aggrieved by the award passed by the Tribuna...

L. Rama Subbu and K.S.A. Krishnamoorthy Vs. Madura College Board, Madu ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [2008]143CompCas505(Mad)

V. Dhanapalan, J. 1. Two of the members of the Respondent Company called Madura College, having been aggrieved by the order dated 10.02.1998 of the Company Law Board (hereinafter referred to as the 'CLB'), made in Company Petition No. 38 of 1997, have preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.2. According to the appellants, Madura College is a Company registered under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1882, on 09.06.1905, having its Registered Office at Thiruparankundram Road, Madurai, Tamil Nadu within the jurisdiction of the District Court of Madurai. The Company is a non-profit Company and limited by guarantee and one which is attracted by Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956. The Company consists of General Body and Executive Committee referred to as Board of Directors and this Board of Directors shall consist of 12 elected members and 3 ex-officio members and these ex-officio members do not have voting powers. At the time of filing of the Company Petition, the number of...

Cheif General Manager/thermal Power Station-i, Neyveli Lignite Corpora ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (2007)1LLJ128Mad

V. Dhanapalan, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been tiled by the Chief General Manager, Thermal Power Station-I Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited, Neyveli-7 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'). In this appeal, the appellant has questioned the correctness of the order dated October 31, 1997 made in W.C. No. 74/96 by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II (Workmen's Compensation) (hereinafter referred to as the 'the Commissioner') awarding a sum of Rs. 66,516/- with 6% interest from the date of filing of the petition as compensation to the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 on account of death of one D. Govindasamy (hereinafter referred to as 'the Workman') who was working as a technician Grade-IV in the appellant/Corporation. The first respondent is the wife of the deceased workman and the respondents 2, 3 and 4 are his children.2. The respondents 1 to 4 herein made a claim before the Commissioner under Section 10(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred ...

Dy. Cit Vs. Shripet Cybertech Systems Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

This is an appeal by the department in which the issue is with regard to disallowance of public issue expenses made with reference to the provisions of section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act deleted by the Commissioner (Appeals) as not falling within the purview of prima facie adjustment.Rival contentions in regard to the above have been very carefully considered. The assessing officer has clearly noted that Supreme Court has held that expenses relating to increase in the capital of the company would be capital in nature. However we would like the assessing officer to verify whether the expenses charged to public issue expenses are relating to increase in capital only or it includes other expenses as well. He would, therefore, limit the prima facie adjustment to the amount relating to increase in the capital of the company. The appeal is allowed in part.I have gone through the order of the learned Senior Vice President in the above case. As I am unable to agree with the findings of t...

Vinayaka Mission's College of Nursing and Para-Medical Sciences, Spons ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2006(4)CTC162; (2006)4MLJ753

N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. W.A. No. 620 of 2006 has been directed against the order made in W.P. No. 15877 of 2003. The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records comprised in the proceedings of the first respondent University dated 18.2.2003, proceeding dated 11.4.2003 and proceeding dated 10.6.2003 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to consider the grant of affiliation for the B.Sc (Nursing) Course offered by the petitioner for the academic years 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 in the light of the permission granted by the Government of Pondicherry, the recognition granted by the Indian Nursing council and the Tamil nadu Nurses and Midwives Council etc., to enable the students to continue their course and undertake all examinations until completion of the course.2. W.A. No. 619 of 2006 has been filed against the order in W.P. No. 508 0 of 2006, wherein the prayer is to issue a writ of certiorari calling for ...

Hindustan Lever Limited Represented by Its Legal Manager T.S. Venkates ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2006(202)ELT591(Mad)

ORDERK. Mohan Ram, J.1. When the above writ petition came up for admission the petitioner was directed to serve notice on the learned Central Government Standing Counsel and after notice Mr.K.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appeared for the respondent.2. The short facts that are necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are set out below:(i) The dispute involved in the appeal in A. No. 46/2005 (M-IV) (Old A. No. 16/2004 (M-IV)) which is pending before the respondent relates to whether the product viz., New Creamy Pond's Moisturising Face Wash ( NCPMFW) also known as Pond's Face Wash / New Pond's Moisturising Face Wash is classifiable under TSH 3304.00 of CETA, 1985 as a skin care preparation as claimed by the Department or under TSH 3402.90 as claimed by the appellant/petitioner herein.(ii) In the said appeal, the petitioner filed a stay application under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking...

S. Parameswaran Vs. the Secretary, Union of India (Uoi), Ministry of F ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [2006]133CompCas568(Mad); 2006(204)ELT386(Mad); [2006]70SCL203(Mad); 2006[4]STR406

ORDERK. Mohan Ram, J.1. When the above writ petition came up for admission, the petitioner was directed to serve notice on the Central Government Standing Counsel as well as on the counsel for the second respondent and that is how the matter was listed on 20.2.2006. Mr. K. Kumar, learned Senior counsel appeared on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of the counsel for the petitioner and the respondents, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. Though no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, written submissions have been filed by the second respondent. 2. The short facts that are necessary for disposal of the above writ petition are set out below: The petitioner, a practicing Chartered Accountant is also a Director in Associated Tribunal Agency Private Limited. The Company, under a valid license from the Reserve Bank of India, carries on business of booking international tickets and arranging tours for its customers. Pursuant to the search conducte...

Jai Enterprises, Rep. by Its Proprietor Mr. V.S. Jayakumar Vs. the Com ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (2006)3MLJ740

ORDERK. Mohan Ram, J.1. By the consent of counsel on either side, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.2. The short facts that are necessary for the disposal of the above writ petition are set out below:The Deputy Commissioner of Customs, the second respondent herein, passed an order-in-original No. 2096/2004 dated 07.05.2004 by ordering finalisation of the Bill of Entry No. 378621 dated 11.02.202. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), the first respondent herein. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), without going into merits of the case, by his Order-in-Appeal No. C3/301/D/2005-Sea and C.Cus.No. 512/2005, dated 05.08.2005 dismissed the appeal as time barred on the ground that he has no power to condone the delay beyond the period prescribed under the statute. Aggrieved by the above said order of the first respondent, the above writ petition has been filed.2. It is contended by the petitioner t...

i. Pichandi Vs. the Superintending Engineer, Tamilnadu Electricity Boa ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (2006)3MLJ178

ORDERK. Mohan Ram, J.1. When the above writ petition came up for admission, the learned Counsel for the Electricity Board took notice and thereafter has filed a detailed counter affidavit.2. The above writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to restore the service connection and reinstall the electric meter and other appliances of the service connection No. 327 of the petitioner in premises of Sumathi Flour Mills at Mudoor Village, Arakonam Taluk, Vellore District, in the following circumstances:(i) According to the petitioner the service connection No. 327 stands in the name of the petitioner and the petitioner was running Sumathi Flour Mill. In respect of theft of electrical energy a criminal case was registered and the petitioner was charge sheeted in C.C.No. 220 of 2001 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Arakonam and the service connection was disconnected on 06.07.2001 and the electric meter was dismandled and removed by th...

Kaleeswara Mills Limited (a Unit of National Textile Corporation Tamil ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (2006)4MLJ419

K. Mohan Ram, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 27.06.1991 made in O.S. No. 561 of 1985 on the file of the III Additional Sub-Court, Coimbatore the first defendant has filed the above appeal.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the suit. 3. The case of the plaintiff as pleaded in the plaint is set out below:(i)The first defendant in or about January 1985 called for tenders and invited offers from the general public for the purchase of two building sites Nos. 2 and 10 of an extent of about 9 cents each, the former at the minimum rate of Rs. 18,000/- per cent and the latter at the minimum rate of Rs. 15,000/-, fixing 14.02.1985 as the last date for receiving tender. The plaintiff sent its tender forms for the purchase of plot No. 10B measuring about 8.425 cents and enclosed a banker's cheque, dated 13.02.1985 for Rs. 10,000/- representing initial deposit amount.(ii)The first defendant accepted the plaintiff's offer by sen...