Chennai Court April 2007 Judgments
C. Govindarajan Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its Secretar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: (2007)5MLJ831
P.K. Misra, J.1. In W.P. Nos. 24472, 24879, 26146, 26138 of 2004, 16010, 32335 of 2003, 16238, 40166 of 2005 the prayer is for quashing G.O.Ms. No. 432 Public Works (R1) dated 16.9.2003.1.1 W.P. Nos. 35514 and 12321 of 2005 have been filed as Public Interest Litigations for quashing G.O.Ms. No. 432 dated 16.9.2003. The allegations made in both the writ petitions are same as in W.P. No. 35513 of 2005.2. W.P. Nos. 23366 to 23371 of 2001, 10533 & 10534 of 2003, 11160 of 2003, 34514 of 2002, 24182 to 24187 of 2001, 1537 of 2002 have been filed to quash G.O.Ms. No. 438 PW (R1) dated 31.8.2000.3. In W.P. Nos. 20860, 20862, 20864 & 20865 of 2003 prayer is to quash G.O.Ms. No. 221 Public Works (R1) dated 2.6.2003 published in Tamil Nadu Gazette on 10.6.2003 so far as it relates to the petitioners land in Manjambakkam village, Ambattur Taluk in Tiruvallur District.4. W.P. No. 35513 of 2005 has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation for quashing G.O.Ms. No. 122 dated 14.7.1998 and to conside...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnaveni and ors. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi), Rep. by the Secreta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ935
ORDERA. Kulasekaran, J.1. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondents 1 to 4 in connection with the four laning of Salem Coimbatore Section of NH-47 from K.M. 1.60 to K.M. 53.00 (package 1) on Annuity Basis titled proposed inter-change at Kondalampatti and to quash the altered plan in Job No. C-622 (drawing No. DRG No. SCPLB/C-622/P1/RH/JN-02/REV) made therein and consequently to direct respondents 1 to 4 to adhere to the original scheme finalised and approved for the said work.2. Mr. T.R. Mani, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted as follows:The petitioners 1 to 5 are co-owners of the lands to an extent of (i) 18454 sq. ft., in Survey No. 96/2A, Kandampatti/Pallapatti Village, Salem West (ii) 11546 sq. ft., in Survey No. 39/1A, Annadhanapatti Village, Salem East and (iii) 5022 sq.ft., in Survey No. 39/1A, Annadhanapatti Village, Salem East, measuring in all 35...
Tag this Judgment!R. Rajamani S/O. Ramasami Gounder and ors. Vs. the Government of Tamil ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: (2007)3MLJ918
P.K. Misra, J..1. The question raised in this appeal filed by the owners of the land against the common order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. Nos. 19347 of 1993, 2710 to 2713 of 1994, which had been filed for quashing the land acquisition proceedings, relates to applicability of the provisions contained in Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act.2. Before considering the question, it is necessary to notice the relevant facts and circumstances:Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was published in the Gazette on 8.1.1986. Subsequently, after holding enquiry under Section 5A of the Act, declaration under Section 6 was notified in the Gazette on 22.1.1987. Publication was made in the newspaper on 23.1.1987 and the publication in the locality was made on 6.2.1987 and 9.2.1987. At that stage, the present appellants filed W.P. No. 1583 of 1987 challenging the declaration under Section 6 of the Act. WMP. No. 2409 of...
Tag this Judgment!Selvaraj and Jayalakshmi Vs. State, Rep. by Assistant Commissioner of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ3824
S. Tamilvanan, J.1. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the appellants/accused challenging the judgment of conviction, dated 26.07.2001, made in S.C. No. 269 of 1999 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, whereby the appellants 1 and 2 were found guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 498A IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo one year RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each with default sentence. Further, the first appellant/A1 was found guilty under Section 304B IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default sentence. The sentence imposed on the first appellant was ordered to run concurrently.2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:The deceased Sowmya was the wife of the first appellant/A1. The first appellant/A1 is the son of the second appellant/A2. The first appellant and the deceased Sowmya were leading their matrimonial life at No. 2, Karukathamman Koil Street, Chetpet, Chennai...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pappu Servai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: 2009ACJ1222
P.R. Shivakumar, J.1. The fourth respondent before the Tribunal, viz., M/s. Oriental Insurance Company has brought forth this appeal, challenging the Judgment and decree dated 16.12.1996 made in M.C.O.P. No. 457 of 1992 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Ist Additional Subordinate Judge), Trichy.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above said civil miscellaneous appeal can be stated thus:(i) On 13.06.1991 at about 11.45 a.m. there occurred an accident on the Manapparai-Trichy main road at a place near All India Radio Station in which two lorries bearing Registration Nos. TCO-4989 and TCI-1265 were involved. Muthamil Vendhan, the fifth respondent in the appeal/first respondent in M.C.O.P. was the owner of the first vehicle, viz., the lorry bearing Registration No. TCO-4989 and the said vehicle stood insured with the National Insurance Company, the sixth respondent in the appeal/second respondent in M.C.O.P. Govindaraj, the seventh respondent in the appeal/thi...
Tag this Judgment!T. Stanes and Company Limited Represented by William Hobert Assistant ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4100; 2007(4)CTC412
ORDERS. Tamilvanan, J.1. This Criminal Revision is directed against the Interlocutory Order, dated 12.12.2002 made in C.M.P.No. 778 of 2002 in STC No. 68/90 on the file of the Special Court under the Essential Commodities Act, Coimbatore.2. The revision petitioner is the accused No. 1 in the case pending before the court below. The first respondent herein filed the criminal complaint under Section 200(a) of Criminal Procedure Code on the ground that the accused had contravened and violated Section 19(1) of Fertiliser Control Order 1985 and that the same is punishable Under Section 7(i) and (ii) of Essential Commodities Act.3. The first respondent / complainant had filed the Interlocutory Application in C.M.P.No. 778 of 2002 under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to recall P.W.1 for the purpose of further examination, for which, it is stated by the first respondent, before the trial court, that due to inadvertence, while P.W.1, Agricultural Officer Thiru. Iqbal was examined...
Tag this Judgment!Bathirammal Vs. K. Kalyanasundaram,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)CTC737
ORDERS. Tamilvanan, J.1. This Criminal Revision has been preferred against the order, dated 26.04.2004 passed in Crl.M.P.No. 1 of 2004 in S.C.No. 292 of 2002 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge / FTC No. III, Coimoatore.2. It is seen that the petitioner herein Tmt.Pathirammal filed a private complaint against the respondents 1 to 3 / accused before the fourth respondent under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for the alleged offence under Section 306 rule with 511 IPC and under Sections 4 and 9 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Ordinance, 2003 and Sections 4 and 9 of the said ordinance rule with Section 511 IPC.3. The petitioner and her husband Thimmayan had borrowed amount from the respondents 1 to 3. The husband of the petitioner herein had borrowed loan from them on 03.04.2000. According to her, she had entrusted certain documents relating to the property to the respondents 1 to 3 towards security for the amount borrowed. She had also en...
Tag this Judgment!Crompton Greaves Ltd. Vs. Dyna
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ARBLR228(Madras); 2007(3)CTC417; (2007)4MLJ1210
P.K. Misra, J.1. This appeal is filed against the order of the learned single Judge in O.P. No. 352 of 1998, which was filed by the appellant to set aside the award dated 8.2.2001 rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal.2. Appellant is a Public Limited Company. A contract was entrusted by DCM (hereinafter referred to as 'DCM' in short) with M/s. Crompton Greaves Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'CGL' in short), the appellant, for an aquaculture unit to be setup by such Principal, namely, DCM. CGL invited tenders for carrying out certain works for construction of ponds, channels, drains and associated works. M/s. Dyna Technologies Pvt. Ltd., the present respondent, who was the fourth respondent, in O.P. No. 352 of 1998, gave its proposal, estimate and quotation for carrying out the work. Thereafter CGL placed a letter of indent and M/s. Dyna Technologies Pvt. Ltd., made several queries and raised certain clarifications and by letter dated 10.10.1994, CGL amended the contract as suggested b...
Tag this Judgment!Karpaga Nagar Nala Urimai Sangam Represented by Its Secretary Shanmuga ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: (2007)4MLJ1006
ORDERJ.A.K. Sampathkumar, J.1. These writ petitions are filed challenging the notification issued by the Government on 23.9.1994 vide G.O.Ms. No. 244 of 1994 (Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department) and also challenging the consequential acts pursuant to issuance of the said G.O. and for praying to quash the same.2. The common plea in both the writs are as follows:The land presently known as Karpaga Nagar was initially owned by the fourth respondent and extent of 73 acres and 60 cents of land in R.S. No. 120 to 126, 130 to 133, 176/1 and 178/2 was owned by the fourth respondent in the erstwhile Tallakulam Town Panchayat, Madurai District. The fourth respondent formed a layout with an object of selling their lands in survey Numbers referred above as house sites. The entire extent was divided into 832 plots. The Director of Town Planning, Madras gave approval for the said layout vide LPMR 1/75. These lands were under the jurisdiction of Tallakulam Town Panchayat before they...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company Limited Rep. by Divisional Manager Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-27-2007
Reported in: 2009ACJ918; (2007)5MLJ354
S. Manikumar, J.1. Aggrieved by the finding with regard to liability and quantum of compensation, the Insurance Company has preferred this appeal.2. Brief facts leading to the appeal are as follows: On 28.09.1996 at 5.00 p.m., when first respondent's son was giving directions to the lorry bearing Registration No.TN04-C-3589 owned by the fourth respondent and insured with the appellant-Insurance Company, placed his hands on the right side of the head light and at that time, a high tension electric wire came in contact with the right edge of the container carried in the lorry and due to electrocution, he was electrocuted. Immediately, he was taken to the Government Victoria Hospital, where he was declared as, dead. In connection with the death, a case in UDR.No. 15 of 1996 was registered at Byatarayanapura Police Station. Parents have claimed compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- for the death of their son.3. The appellant-Insurance Company resisted the claim petition and denied that the employ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »