Chennai Court July 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.
M. Chinniyan Vs. Kasthuri,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC277
M. Chockalingam, J.1. Challenge is made to a judgment of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Erode, made in RCA No. 5 of 2001 affirming an order of eviction made by the Rent Controller of the said place in RCOP No. 26 of 1998 a petition for eviction on the ground of willful default and personal use and occupation filed by the respondents herein.2. The Court heard the learned Senior Counsel on either side.3. The respondents 1 to 3 herein filed the said RCOP alleging that they are the absolute owners of the property described in the Schedule to the petition; that the revision petitioner was put in possession by one Dhanapal, the power agent of Radhakrishnan, the husband of the first respondent and father of the respondents 2 and 3; that the revision petitioner-tenant filed O.S. No. 87/89 before the Sub Court, Erode, against the said Radhakrishnan and the respondents 1 to 3 herein alleging that they attempted to evict him forcibly, and hence, permanent injunction should be granted restrainin...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sapthagiri Traders Ltd.,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: [2009]180TAXMAN605(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J. 1. The above tax case appeals are directed against the common order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated dated 30.09.2005 in ITA Nos.2119, 2120, 2123, 2124, 2121, 2122, 2126 and 2127/Mds/1998 for the assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95 respectively.2. The Revenue is the appellant. The relevant assessment years are 1993-94 and 1994-95. The assessees are in the business of purchase and sale of IMFL products. The assessees had shown as if they had purchased the packing materials biz bottles etc., had given it to M/s. Mcdowell and Company, got the liquor filled and then sold them. For the assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95, the assessees claimed deduction of the cost towards the packing materials for IMFL. The Assessing Officer, finding that the packing materials were readily available in the market at a far lower prices, the principal of the assessee companies had purchased the packing materials at a far lower price, the cost of packing material claimed by the ...
K. Krishnamoorthi Vs. the Station Director, All India Radio and
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ416
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. The petitioner is the eldest son of one N. Kumaravel, who unfortunately passed away on 22.11.2000 and he was working as a Security Guard in the respondent establishment.2. The petitioner, therefore, made an application dated 29.12.2000 seeking for appointment on compassionate ground. A letter was sent to the Madras Office to inform the petitioner that his application was kept for the 'Group - C' post along with similarly placed applicants and his serial number was 11 and there was also no vacancy under 5% quota for compassionate appointment in the All India Radio, Tamil Nadu Zone and his application will be considered in the line of seniority.3. Thereafter, the petitioner sent reminders. On 11.3.2004, he was informed that his serial number was 5 in the waiting list. Finally, the respondents informed the petitioner by a letter dated 22.9.2005 that his claim for appointment cannot be granted because as per the guidelines of Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT...
Sundari Vs. the District Collector and
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ399
ORDERP.R. Shivakumar, J.1. This writ petition has been filed seeking the issue of a writ of certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent relating to his proceedings in No. Nil dated 02.07.2007, whereby the petitioner has been directed to remove the tin shed put up by the petitioner abutting the Sub-Registrar Office on its north in Pandalkudi, encroaching upon the property vested with the Panchayat Board and quash the same.2. We have heard the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and that of the learned Special Government Pleader, who has taken notice on behalf of the respondents.3. According to the petitioner, an extent of 20 square metres of land in Survey No. 107/580 of Pandalkudi Village, Aruppukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District was assigned to her by the Tahsildar of Aruppukottai in his proceedings H.S.T. 152/2005-2006/A3 dated 04.07.2005. As the President of Pandalkudi Panchayat raised objections for the assignments made in favour of the peti...
The Superintendent of Police Vs. J. Muthiah Selvaraj and the Registrar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-11-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ1228
ORDERF.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. The superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar is the petitioner. The challenge is to the order of the State Administrative Tribunal dated 03.10.2001 passed in O.A.No. 2721 of 1996. By the order impugned in this writ petition, the Tribunal set aside the charge memo issued to the first respondent in P.R.No. 7 of 1996 dated NIL.2. At the relevant point of time, the first respondent was working as Head Constable in Alangulam Police Station. On 12.09.1994, a case in Cr.No. 125 of 1994 was registered under Section 366 I.P.C. The first respondent was entrusted with the task of securing the accused and the kidnapped girl. The girl and the accused were handed over to the first respondent by the Ambattur Estate Police on 14.09.1994 evening. After taking into custody the accused and the girl, the first respondent ought to have brought them straight to Alangulam Police Station and handed over them to the Sub Inspector of Police for further investigation. But the firs...
R. Gandhi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2007
Reported in: (2008)13VST390(Mad)
ORDERA.P. Shah, C.J.1. All these writ petitions filed by the importers/dealers of motor vehicles challenge the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, 1990 (Act 13 of 1990) (hereinafter, for brevity sake, will be referred to as 'the Act'). The Act was in replacement of an Ordinance (No. 1 of 1990) promulgated by the Governor on February 19, 1990 and published in the gazette on February 20, 1990. The Act received the assent of the President on April 24, 1990, published in the gazette on the next day, and deemed to have come into force from February 20, 1990.2. The challenge to the validity of the Act which was basically on the ground of infringement of Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution was originally dealt with and rebutted on the basis of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Bhagatram Rajeev Kumar v. Commissioner of Sales Tax and State of Bihar v. Bihar Chamber of Commerce : [1996]2SCR184 , wherein it was held that in o...
Arun Alexander Lakshman, Proprietor Alraj Builders and V.E. Arun Vs. A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2007
Reported in: IV(2007)BC441; 2007(4)CTC449; (2007)5MLJ932
R. Banumathi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge in A.No.2322/2006 in Tr. C.S. No. 578/2002 declining to condone the delay of 714 days in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC and dismissing the Petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.2. Brief facts are as follows:The appellants/Defendants entered into a joint venture Agreement in March 1998 with the respondent/ plaintiff for developing her property situated at Aminjakarai. Dispute arose between the parties and hence the terms of Agreement could not be carried out and dispute led to filing of suits by both parties. Appellants/Defendants filed C.S. No. 113/2001 on the file of High Court for recovery of a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- by way of damages from the respondent/plaintiff. Respondent/plaintiff has filed O.S. No. 86/2002 [instituted as informa pauperis] for declaration that the Agreement dated 06.04.1998 stood cancelled because of the non performance of the part of the Agr...
R. Periyasamy Vs. T. Bhagyam and T. JasmIn Deva Arul Selvi Minor Rep. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC417; (2007)6MLJ1625
ORDERM. Chockalingam, J.1. Challenge is made to a judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, namely the VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras, in RCA No.1212 of 2004 which arose from the order of eviction passed in RCOP No.425 of 2003 by the Rent Controller, namely the XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras.2. The original landlord namely the husband of the first respondent herein, filed two petitions in RCOP Nos.425 and 426 of 2003 for eviction on the ground of additional accommodation stating that the premises bearing Old No.23, New No.107, Sundaram Pillai Nagar, Vaidyanatha Mudali Street, Ennore High Road, Tondiarpet, Chennai, belonged to him; that the respondents in the RCOPs were the tenants under him; that in the rear portion the family of the landlord is living; that his wife started a School under the name and style of Angels Baby Land in the first floor; that in the front portion, number of shops are situated; that six tenants are occupying the same; that out of s...
The Management of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram D ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2007
Reported in: (2007)5MLJ1
A.P. Shah, C.J.1. Admit. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent waives service. By consent, the appeal is taken up for hearing. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J., whereby he has quashed the orders of the appellant Corporation dated 19.4.2000 and 19.9.2000 and directed the appellant Corporation to reinstate the respondent workman into service within a period of two weeks with pay protection, continuity of service, backwages, etc. The brief facts leading to this appeal are stated hereunder.3. The respondent workman initially joined service in the appellant Corporation as Conductor in the year 1992 and subsequently, the Employment Exchange sponsored his name for the post of Driver and thus, the respondent was appointed as Driver in the appellant Corporation by order dated 2.5.1994. On completion of 240 days of service, his services were confirmed. While the respondent was working in the Kancheepuram Depot of the appellant C...
R. Dhanalakshimi and ors. Vs. Senthilkumari and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-10-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CTC29
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The appellants, who are defendants in original suits Nos. 209 of 1996 and 63 of 1995 filed Appeal Suits Nos. 233 and 234 of 2000 against the judgment and decree of the trial Court made in those suits granting the relief of permanent injunction as prayed for with declaratory relief, in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs. The other four appeals in Tr. A.S. Nos. 1027 to 1030 of 2001 are filed aggrieved by the dismissal of the suits filed by the respective appellants/plaintiffs in those suits, for injunction against the respondents/plaintiffs in Original Suits Nos. 353, 356, 359 and 404 of 1997.2. The facts of the case is as follows:The suit in O.S. Nos. 209 of 1996 was filed by one Senthil Kumari against Sundaram, Dhanalakshmi and the legal heirs of Ramadoss for the relief of permanent injunction on the ground that the suit property in an extent of 66 cents was originally owned by one Rengasamy Naidu. One of the sons Ramanujam Naidu filed a suit in O.S. No. 198...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »