Chennai Court October 2007 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.
Victor Auxilium and Susainathan Auxillia Vs. State Rep. by Assistant C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ774
ORDERS. Palanivelu, J.1. These petitions have been filed to call for the records in C.C. No. 3819 of 2006 on the file of IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, and to quash the same.2. For the sake of convenience, the status of the parties, as mentioned in Crl.O.P. No. 4332 of 2007, would be referred and the petitioner in Crl.O.P. No. 8922 of 2007 by name Auxillia.3. The facts, in a nutshell, are as under:3.1. First petitioner is son of second petitioner and second respondent is the de facto complainant, who is wife of first petitioner. The marriage of first petitioner and second respondent was celebrated on 22.06.2000 in St. Theresas Church, Trichy.3.2. At the time of marriage, all the accused demanded 80 sovereigns of gold jewels and Rs. 6.00 lakhs in cash towards dowry, however, the parents of the de facto complainant offered 50 sovereigns of gold jewels, besides a sum of Rs. 1.00 lakh in cash. The couple was living at Thiruvanmiyur in Chennai. First accused left for Singapo...
Rukmani College of Education Run by Rukmani Educational and Charitable ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CTC545; AIR2008Mad127; 2008(3)AIRKarR210(FB); 2008(1)MLJ1217
ORDERA.P. Shah, C.J.1. This case has been referred to the Full Bench as the Division Bench found that there is divergence of opinion and, particularly, the ratio of the Division Bench decision in The University of Madras v. Loordhu Ammal Educational Trust and Anr. 2005 W.L.R 395 cannot be reconciled with the decision of the other Division Bench in Vinayaka Missions College of Nursing and Para-Medical Sciences v. The Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council : (2006)4MLJ753 .2. The challenge in the present petition is to the order of the second respondent Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, dated 08.8.2007, by which the University has granted provisional affiliation to Rukmani College of Education started by the petitioner Trust for running B.Ed. Course with an intake of 100 students for the academic year 2007-2008. The petitioner has questioned the order of the second respondent University on the ground that the petitioner is entitled for grant of affiliation for B.Ed. Course from the acad...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Rep. by Its Executive Director and the G ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-06-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ1770
R. Banumathi, J.1. This Writ Appeal is preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge made in W.P. No. 11838/1996 dated 07.02.2002, setting aside the order of dismissal of the respondent.2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that: the respondent joined the service of the appellant Company _ Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited ['BHEL', for short], a Government of India Undertaking, as Engineer Trainee on 15.12.1983 for a period of one year with effect from 25.11.1983. On completion of the training, the respondent was absorbed as Product Engineer by order dated 06.03.1985 with effect from 25.11.1984. At the time of the said appointment, the respondent had stated in the application that she belonged to Scheduled Tribe and she has also produced a Community Certificate issued by the Tahsildar which stated that she belonged to Konda Reddy community [ST]. Subsequently, in the Attestation Form filed by the respondent, she has stated that she does not belong to SC/ST Community. In...
T. Uday Kumar Vs. the District Collector,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ1439
ORDERF.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. W.P. No. 8618 of 2006 has been filed by the petitioner therein seeking to challenge the order of the second respondent therein, namely, Tahsildar, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk. As per the said order, the Writ Petitioner was directed not to proceed with any constructions in an extent of 90 cents situated in S. No. 297/1 since an enquiry as regards the issuance of patta was pending.2. W.P. No. 4950 of 2007 is a Public Interest Litigation and the petitioner therein seeks for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 4 in that writ petition to clear, maintain and construct a General Hospital in the site earmarked for Peripheral Hospital in T.S. No. 14 of Block No. 29 Kodambakkam Village, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk. The T.S. No. 14 referred to therein corresponds to the original S. No. 297/1.3. W.P. Nos. 8624 and 8625 of 2006 have been preferred by the petitioners therein challenging the order of the first respondent therein, namely, the Special C...
Aided Primary School, Rep. by Its Secretary, Correspondent Vs. Distric ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-2007
Reported in: (2008)1MLJ726
P.R. Shivakumar, J.1. Since a common issue has arisen in the above said writ appeal as well as the above said two writ petitions, by order of Court, all the matters stand listed before us for disposal and we consider it convenient to dispose of all the three matters by a common judgment.2. The procedure for appointing Noon Meal Organisers for Nutritious Meal centres functioning at Private Aided Schools (Minority/Non-minority) has been put in issue in all the three cases. According to the appellant in W.A. No. 125/2005 which is also the petitioner in W.P. No. 2478 of 2007 and the petitioner in W.P. No. 2401 of 2007, the choice of selection should be restricted to the panel of five names submitted by the Correspondent of the School concerned and hence the orders impugned in the writ petitions are liable to be quashed and consequently the respondents should be directed to select any one of the persons from the panel of names sent by the Management of the School concerned. In this regard, ...
Minor Shyamala and ors. Vs. A. Madheswaran and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-05-2007
Reported in: 2009ACJ1243; AIR2008Mad1
S. Manikumar, J.1. The first appellant claimed herself to be the adopted minor child of the deceased. Appellants 2 and 3 are the parents of the deceased. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 5-2-2001 made in M.C.O.P. No. 782 of 1997 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal District Court), Erode, dismissing their claim petition, the present appeal is filed.2. Brief facts leading to the appeal are as follows:(i) On 16-8-1996, when the deceased-Banumathy was alighting the bus through the front entrance, the driver of the bus owned by the first respondent herein, started the bus without noticing the passenger, due to which, the said Banumathy fell down and succumbed to injuries.(ii) It is the case of the appellants-claimants that the deceased married one Gurusubramaniam of Manakkuppam near Tirukoilur on 26-10-1993. At the time of marriage, she was aged 18 years. Husband of the deceased had illegal intimacy with one Prema of the same village, which fact was not kn...
Shi Yang @ Sunny Vs. A. Kannagi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ617
ORDERS. Palanivelu, J.1. This petition has been filed to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No. 381 of 2006, pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. V, Salem, against the petitioner and to quash the same.2. Respondent is the complainant. She preferred a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. before the said Court against one Mr. Wang and Mr. Charles, General Managers of the company, by name, M/s. Tianjin Tianshi (India) Pvt. Ltd., having its office at Chennai.3. The allegations in the complaint go the effect that the company is engaged in marketing of food supplement and cosmetic products and selling them through the members, appointed for the purpose. The complainant is a four star level member in the company. Both the accused asked the complainant to become a franchisee for Salem region to stock and sell their products, for which she was also promised glorious growth and induced to part with a sum of Rs. 1,53,000/- by means of demand drafts. She also fulfilled the requirement...
The Management, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals Rep. by Its Pres ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: (2008)IILLJ90Mad
ORDERM. Chockalingam, J.1. Challenge is made to an order passed by the first respondent in M.W.I.A. No. 63 of 2004 dated 3.6.2005, whereby the delay occasioned in filing petition by the respondent-union claiming minimum wages under the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is condoned.2. The Court heard the learned Counsel appearing on either side and also looked into the materials available on record.3. Concededly, 124 employees filed an application before the first respondent, whereby they sought for fixation of minimum wages by the writ petitioner-Management. The period for which they sought for minimum wages was from January, 1999 to December, 2004. While they filed the application, there was a delay of approximately six years. Hence, while they filed application for payment of minimum wages, an application to condone the delay was also filed. The same was countered by the writ petitioner herein. The first respondent has condoned the delay by allowing the application, which is ...
Mono Products Vs. Registrar, Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: (2008)14VST234(Mad)
ORDERChitra Venkataraman, J.1. The writ petitions are filed against the orders of the Tribunal herein for quashing the order demanding interest on the ground that the assessee had paid the base level sales tax belatedly while availing the benefit of deferral of sales tax. Admittedly, the deferral of sales tax was granted to the petitioner in respect of three expansion units on different dates, the first of the two fell under consideration under G.O. Ms. No. 500 Industries (MTG II) Department dated May 14, 1990 and that of the third unit was granted on October 6, 1994 under G.O. Ms. No. 119, Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowments Department dated April 13, 1994. It was pointed out by the third respondent that the assessee had not maintained the payment on base level sale figure as per G.O. Ms. No. 119, Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowments Department dated April 13, 1994. Hence, the petitioner herein was liable to pay the tax to the tune of Rs. 27 lakhs. Faced with the threat of ...
Deputy Commissioner (Ct), Madurai Division Vs. R.S. Granites and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: (2008)13VST217(Mad)
ORDERK. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. In this writ petition the correctness of the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal is put in issue. By the impugned order, the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal set aside the order passed by the petitioner in his proceedings dated October 29, 2002 non-suiting the first respondent for making an application under Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Disputes) Act, 2002 and further directed the petitioner to take the application of the first respondent on file and proceed further in accordance with law.2. The facts which culminated in filing of this writ petition are as follows:The first respondent was a dealer in granite. For the assessment year 1993-94, the assessing officer passed a revised assessment order disallowing the claim of exemption of export sales to the tune of Rs. 10,22,461. As a result of such revision of assessment, the first respondent has to pay tax of Rs. 81,797, surcharge of Rs. 12,270, additional sa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »