Chennai Court August 2007 Judgments
The Management of Wentworth Estate Vs. Rethini
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2009ACJ413; 2007(5)CTC733; (2008)ILLJ732Mad; (2007)5MLJ945
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred against the order dated 24.10.1997 in W.C.C.No. 31 of 1997 made by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore.2. The respondent herein filed the claim petition before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore, claiming compensation from the appellant Estate on the ground that her husband by name Dhoddan, who was employed as Daily Labourer in the appellant Estate, died on 29.7.1996 during the course of his employment.3. The said claim petition was resisted by the appellant by contending that the deceased Dhoddan was a temporary worker of Cherambadi division of the appellant Estate and he was found lying dead in field No. 19R at Cherambadi Division near a bathing pit on 29.7.1996 and on that particular day, due to the death of one of the relative of Dhoddan, who was also an employee in the Estate, did not come for work and went to dig a pit (grave) for burying the body. After digging the pit, he went to take ...
Tag this Judgment!Nachayal Vs. Pongiannan S/O. Palani Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC42; (2007)6MLJ787
C. Nagappan, J.1. The Appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 23.11.1994 rendered in O.S.No. 225 of 1990 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge, Erode. The plaintiff in the suit is the appellant herein.2. The plaintiff filed the suit seeking for a decree directing the division of the suit properties into 27 equal shares by metes and bounds and allot 10 such shares to the plaintiff and put her in separate possession thereof. The case of the plaintiff is that her father Palani Gounder had two wives, namely, Thangammal and Kuppayal, the second defendant in the suit and the plaintiff and defendants 5 to 7 are the daughters of first wife Thangammal while the defendants 8 to 12 are the daughters and sons of the predeceased daughter of Thangammal by name Mottaiakkal alias Karuppathal and the first defendant is the son of Palani Gounder through his second wife Kuppayal and the defendants 3 and 4 are the daughters of Palani Gounder through Kuppayal. According to the plaint...
Tag this Judgment!Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep. by Its Board of Directors, Vs. Avadi Th ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC439; (2007)6MLJ1224
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 22878 of 2002 dated 27.6.2002, allowing the writ petition filed by the respondents herein.2. The respondents herein filed the writ petition stating that they are registered Societies under the Societies Registration Act and in the first respondent Society about 497 members and in the second respondent Society 400 members were allotted house plots by appellants/the Housing Board under the Avadi Scheme in the year 1993. The concerned members have also constructed houses in the plots allotted to them and they are residing therein. The Housing Board passed resolution No. 45/2000, pursuant to which the second appellant herein by letter dated 30.7.2001 directed the subordinate officials to execute and present the sale deeds for registration and conveying the plots to the members of the respondent Societies after collecting the capitalised value of the plots with interest....
Tag this Judgment!Mangaiyarkarasi Aided Middle School Rep. by Its Manager and Correspond ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: (2008)1MLJ188
ORDERV. Dhanapalan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the Manager and Correspondent of an aided Middle School seeking a mandamus to forbear the respondents 1 to 4 from allowing the 5th respondent to run Jayam Primary & High School at Sundaresapuram, Venmankondan Post, Udayarpalayam Taluk, Perambalur District.2. The case of the petitioner school, in brief, is as under:The petitioner school has been functioning as an aided Middle School at Sundaresapuram Village, Venmankondan Post, Udayarpalayam Taluk, Perambalur District since 1956 with 112 students on its rolls at present and there are also three Government High Schools and two Panchayat Union Middle Schools within the radius of 2-3 kms and while this being the case, the fifth respondent has started a school from the academic year 2006-2007 even without recognition, thereby inducing the parents of the wards studying in the petitioner school to get Transfer Certificate and to admit their wards in the fifth respondent school. In ...
Tag this Judgment!Sridharan Vs. Lakshmikantham Ammal (Died) Krishnaswamy @ Mohan and ors ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC203; (2007)6MLJ856
ORDERS. Ashok Kumar, J.1. The 5th defendant who alone contesting the suit has preferred this Revision challenging the decision of the trial court with regard to preliminary issue relating to payment of court fee.2. The first respondent herein has filed the suit in O.S. No. 495 of 1998 for the relief of Declaration and Injunction. The plaintiff contended that the suit properties and other properties originally belonged to one Ponnammal. She donated the properties to Kannammal @ Thailyalnayaki. The suit item is shown as the 1st item in registered Donation Deed. She was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the properties by planting coconut trees and harvesting the same. The plaintiff inherited the said property and she is in possession and enjoyment of the properties on behalf of other legal heirs of Kannammal also. While so, there were deeds executed to one Chidambaram for leasing the usufruct of the coconut trees. Chidambaram defaulted in paying the rents and had initiated a proceed...
Tag this Judgment!V. Usha Vs. the Director of Town Panchayat,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: (2008)1MLJ182
ORDERN. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. Prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order of reversion dated 7.3.1995 reverting the petitioner from the post of Typist to the post of Record Clerk and the consequential order passed by the third respondent dated 8.3.1995 and the further order passed by the 4th respondent dated 13.3.1995 and for a direction to retain the petitioner as Typist in any one of the Town Panchayat in Villupuram District.2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Record Clerk on 30.5.1986 and after due selection he was posted at the Office of the Town Panchayat, Ulundurpet. The period of probation as Record Clerk of the petitioner was declared as on 30.5.1988 by the proceedings of the competent authority dated 12.8.1988. The post of Record Clerk and Bill Collector being interchangeable, the petitioner was posted as Bill Collector at Kattumannarkoil Town Panchayat on 24.10.1990. The petitioner served as Bill Col...
Tag this Judgment!P. Mylsamy Vs. the State Rep. by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ191
ORDERS. Palanivelu, J.1. The defacto complainant is one Radha, who is working as Waterwoman in Kovilpalayam Panchayat within the limits of Kinatukadavu Police Station.2. It is stated in the First Information Report [for short, 'FIR'] and the charge sheet that on 08.4.2007 at about 8.30 am, while the said Radha went to the house of the petitioner/accused to serve the Property Tax Demand Notice, the petitioner is alleged to have held abused him in filthy language besides criminally intimidating with stone and hence, he is punishable under Sections 506(ii) and 294(b) IPC.3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously contends that the defacto complainant, who is a waterwoman in the Panchayat, is not at all authorised to serve any notice to anybody else in the Panchayat and only the Panchayat Assistant is prescribed in the relevant Rules. Rule 29 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayats (Assessment and Collection of Taxes) Rules, 1999 [for short, 'Rules'] states that any tax or fe...
Tag this Judgment!Manickavasagam, Vs. T.P. Ponnusamy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC351; (2007)6MLJ966
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred against the Judgment and Decree dated 11.7.2000 made in A.S.No. 36 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Erode, modifying the Judgment and Decree dated 27.12.1999 made in O.S.No. 191 of 1998 on the file of the District Munsif Court-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai.2. The Plaintiff/first respondent herein filed the suit in O.S. No. 191 of 1998 seeking declaration and permanent injunction contending that he is the absolute owner of the suit 'A' Schedule property by virtue of settlement deed dated 28.6.1994, and the right to take water through 'B' Schedule property for irrigation. The appellants/defendants 2 to 4 denied the genuineness of the title deed contending that they are the absolute owners of the property in R.S.No. 1013/4 and they are having share in 'B' Schedule property and for the past over 50 years their ancestors have been using the suit 'B' schedule property to irrigate their lands.3....
Tag this Judgment!R. Muthukrishnan Vs. the Secretary to Home Department, Government of T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: (2007)5MLJ1351
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. In all these writ petitions as common order is under challenge and common question of law involved, they were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners have challenged G.O. Ms. No. 292 dated 22nd Feb., 2007, issued from Home (Tr. V) Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai. By the said order, giving reference to Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'MV Act'), wearing of headgear (helmets) have been made compulsory for drivers and pillion riders of all two wheelers.3. Mr. R. Muthukrishnan, advocate of this Court, who is the petitioner in W.P. No. 18708/07, made the following submissions:a) The impugned order is arbitrary, patently illegal and unconstitutional, being in derogation of Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India as it restricts the freedom of movement of two wheeler riders and pillion riders.b) The said order infringes the personal liberty protected under Article 21 of th...
Tag this Judgment!N. Kunnai Gowder Vs. the Coimbatore District Co-op. Milk Producers' Un ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC491; (2008)1MLJ119
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. This appeal arises out of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 25.2.2004 made in W.P.No. 3965 of 2004 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein seeking issue of a writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the charge memo dated 26.9.1997 passed by the first respondent and to quash the same.2. A vignette the facts is suffice. The appellant was working as Assistant Manager (Industrial Relations) in the first respondent/Co-operative Society. On 26.9.1997, the first respondent issued a charge memo to the appellant alleging that he had regularised the services of casual workers in anticipation of Board's approval. On 29.10.1997, the appellant submitted his explanation denying the allegations levelled against him. The first respondent, thereafter, issued an advance intimation notice on 4.11.1997 stating that the appellant is to retire on account of superannuation on the afternoon of 9.1.1998. Subsequently, the first respondent, by proc...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »