Chennai Court December 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.
V. Thangavel Vs. Associated Business Credits Ltd. (In Liquidation) and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2007
Reported in: [2009]149CompCas543(Mad)
S. Rajeshwaran, J.1. This application has been filed to direct the official liquidator to file Form No. 32 notifying the resignation of the petitioner with effect from October 28, 1999, with the Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu, Chennai.2. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that as early as on September 12, 2005 (V. Thangavel v. Associated Business Credits Ltd. (in liquidation) [2007] 137 Comp Cas 506), an order has been passed by the Company Law Board, wherein the letter of request given by the applicant on November 3, 1999, has been accepted and the petitioner's resignation ought to have taken effect upon expiration of one month thereof, i.e., December 3,1999, in terms of Article 83. It was made clear by the Company Law Board in the order, dated September 12, 2005 (V. Thangavel v. Associated Business Credits Ltd. (in liquidation) [2007] 137 Comp Cas 506) that the cessation of office of the director of the petitioner is with effect from December 3,1999. However, this is witho...
T. Chitra Vs. the Chief Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil N ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2007
Reported in: (2008)1MLJ422
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition was preferred by the petitioner against G.O. Ms. No. 742, Public (Law & Order - F) Department, dated 27th July, 2006, published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette Extraordinary No. 177 dated 27th July, 2006, in Part-II - Section 2, whereby one man Commissions of Inquiry of Justice Thiru. K.P. Sivasubramaniam was constituted to inquire into the allegations of fraudulent grabbing of land assigned to Adi Dravidar (S.C.) and landless poor in Siruthavur Village, Chengalpet Taluk, Kancheepuram District under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952.2. The main grounds of challenge as noticed by learned single Judge, who referred the matter for hearing by Division Bench are:a) Only the State Government or the Central Government as the case may be can appoint a Commission for public purpose under the Act and not the Department or a Secretary.b) The Government under law means not a single individual Department or the Chief Secretary, but the Council...
Veerumandi Vs. Mayee and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2007
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ614
P.R. Shivakumar, J.1. This Second Appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and decree of the Third Additional District Judge, Madurai, dated 9.10.1995 made in A.S. No. 181/1987 confirming the Judgment and decree of the trial court namely, the court of District Munsif, Thirumangalam, dated 18.8.1987 in O.S. No. 601 of 1984, on the file of the said court. The first defendant in the original suit is the appellant in the Second Appeal.2. One Duraisamy who is the sole plaintiff had filed the original suit on the file of the District Munsif, Thirumangalam for the relief of declaration of his title in respect of the suit properties, for recovery of possession and for recovery of mesne profits in respect of the suit properties. According to the plaint averments, the suit properties were purchased by late. Andi Thevar with the help of his own funds in the name of his wife Vanappetchi. The said Andi Thevar predeceased is wife Vanappetchi and on the death of Venappetchi 2 years prior to the...
Maheswari Vs. M. Manoharan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2007
Reported in: (2008)5MLJ1153
Chitra Venkataraman, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is by the respondent wife against the order of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai, granting a decree for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.2. The respondent husband filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of the marriage on the ground of cruelty and the attempts made to bring about a settlement and to restore matrimonial peace and bring about re-union yielded no fruitful result.3. The allegations therein were denied by the appellant herein. She also filed a petition for maintenance in M.C. No. 164 of 2005 seeking maintenance at Rs. 5,000/- per month from the respondent herein from the date of the petition. By a common order dated 24th September 2007, while granting a decree of dissolution of marriage by divorce, the Family Court directed the respondent herein to pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- per month as maintenance to the appellant herein fro...
Venkataraman @ Murali @ Raja, Vs. R. Venugopal and R. Ganesan @ Vinaya ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2007
Reported in: (2008)2MLJ348
ORDERM. Venugopal, J.1. The Civil Revision Petitioners herein are the respondents in Execution Petition No. 90 of 2002 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Pondicherry. 2. Before the lower Court, the respondents/petitioners in the Execution Petition No. 90 of 2002 have prayed for the relief:(i) to grant leave to them to execute the French Grosse Copy of the Usufructuary Gift Deed dated 25/04/34 as a Deemed Decree;(ii) to grant leave to execute the Deemed Decree (Section 146 C.P.C.);(iii) to deliver to the civil revision petitioners/respondents vacant and actual possession of the E.P. Schedule Mentioned Property by ejecting the respondents, bound by the decree, and if necessary by removing the person/persons bound by the said decree and further if necessary by breaking open the locks, if any, put up by the Respondents/Obstructors or person/persons, bound by the said decree, in accordance with Order XXI Rule 35(1) & (3) of the C.P.C.3. In the counter filed to the E.P. No...
Orj Electronics Oxides Ltd. Vs. Customs, Excise and Service Tax and an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2007
Reported in: 2008(225)ELT202(Mad); (2008)1MLJ1; 2009[16]STR240
A.P. Shah, C.J.1. Admit. Learned Assistant Solicitor General waives service for the second respondent. By consent, the appeal is taken up for hearing. The appellant is a company having its registered office in Pudukottai District. The appellant originally filed Writ Petition No. 14908 of 2007 at Principal Bench at Chennai to quash the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal - South Zone Bench, Chennai ('Tribunal' in short) dated 5.3.2007, whereby the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit Rs. 1 Crore as a pre-condition for hearing the appeal on merits. By order dated 18.7.2007, this Court gave liberty to the appellant to file necessary applications for restoration of the appeal which was dismissed for default and for rectification with relevant documents and the Tribunal was directed to consider the said applications and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the appellant filed R.O.M. (Rectification of Mistake) Petition before...
Sri Swaminathan Construction, a Regd. Partnership Firm, Rep. by Its Ma ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2007
Reported in: (2008)2MLJ637
F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the appellantagainst the order of the Principal District Judge, Thanjavur, dated 30.06.2003 in Arbitration Original Petition No. 71/2003 (in short 'AOP No. 71/2003'). The Civil Revision Petition has been preferred by the same appellant as against the order of the same court passed in Execution Petition No. 43/2003 (in short 'EP No. 43/2003') in an Arbitration Award on 01.08.2003.2. The brief facts which are required to be stated are:(a) The appellant undertook a contract for construction of an Engineering College for the 1st respondent under Agreement dated 07.02.2001. One Mr. M.N. Mohammed Rafi of M/s. Rafi Associates of Kumbakonam was appointed as the Architech and Consultant of the 1st respondent. The conditions of the contract contained a paragraph under the caption 'General', as per which, according to the appellant, in the event of any dispute or difference between the appellant and the 1st responde...
Arunachalam @ Annamalai Vs. Subbulakshmi Ammal,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2007
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ632
G. Rajasuria, J.1. This appeal is focussed as against the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 566 of 1991 dated 11.11.1994 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Dindigul.2. The parties, for convenience sake, are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status before the trial Court.3. Broadly but briefly, the case of the plaintiff as stood exposited from the plaint could be portrayed thus:(i) The suit property originally belonged to one deceased Ramasamy Pillai who during his life time had appointed one Muthusamy Pillai, the husband of the first defendant and father of the defendants 2 and 3, to look after his properties during the former's absence from India in connection with his stay in Cylon. Subsequently, Ramasamy Pillai returned to India and asked for accounts from his agent Muthusamy Pillai and also asked him to vacate the suit property; however, the latter prayed for some time to vacate the same. Ramasamy Pillai issued lawyer's notice on 07.04.1977 which...
V. Prakash, Sr. Advocate, Honorary President, Mrf Units Workers Union ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2007
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR543]
ORDERP. Jyothimani, J.1. This Court by order dated 30.11.2007 has disposed of the writ petition with the following direction:6. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation within one week from today and on such representation, the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders permitting the petitioner to address the gate meeting at MRF Factory at Itchiputhur (near Arakkonam) between 2.30 p.m. and 3.30 p.m. to be held on 16.12.2007 (Sunday), by using megaphone.2. Subsequently, on the mentioning of Mr. Sanjay Mohan, learned Counsel appearing for M/s. MRF Limited, Arakkonam, it was posted for certain clarifications. When the matter was taken up on 4.12.2007, M.P. No. 1 of 2007 in W.P. No. 36263 of 2007 was filed by MRF Arakkonam Workers' Welfare Union represented by its Secretary to implead itself as a party and M.P. No. 2 of 2007 was filed by MRF Limited, Itchiputhur, Arakkonam, ...
K. Hariharan and L. Gopinathan Vs. the Vice Chancellor, Bharatidasan U ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2007
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ465
M. Jaichandren, J.1. Heard Mr. U. Karunakaran, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. V. Govardhanan, the learned Counsel appearing for the first and second respondents and Mr. V. Manoharan, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the third respondent.2. It is stated by the petitioners that they had joined the Bachelor of Arts Degree Course in Economics in the third respondent College during the academic year 1996-97. The petitioners were due to write the final Semester Examinations, in the third year of their degree course, during the months of April-May 1999. On 04.02.1999, elections were being conducted in the Department of Economics to elect the office bearers. The petitioners and some others had requested the head of the department not to conduct the department elections at the fag end of the year. During the elections, disputes had arisen amongst the supporters of the various candidates resulting in creation of serious animosity. As a consequence, a crimi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »