Chennai Court September 2007 Judgments
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Vs. Rajarajeswari Agency and S.K. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-28-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ525
R. Banumathi, J.1. Aggrieved against the Order of the learned Single Judge in O.P.No. 295 of 2000 (dated 31.10.2003), setting aside the award passed by the Arbitrator, Bharath Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) has preferred this Appeal.2. The brief facts giving rise to this Appeal are as follows:(i) The First Respondent is physically handicapped Ex-serviceman. LPG Distributorship was granted to the First Respondent in 1996 for supply of LPG Cylinders for household consumers in Saligramam Area. There were frequent complaints from customers due to market backlog. For shortage of 249 cylinders, a debit note for Rs. 3,73,500/- was raised on 31.07.1994 and part payment against the same was received from the First Respondent-Distributor on 08.01.1996 (Rs. 2,11,650/-) and not the entire amount. The balance amount of Rs. 1,66,850/- was due to the Company on account of SV/TV amount. Inspite of letters, which were duly acknowledged by the First Respondent-Distributor no amount was paid. When ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Rajalakshmi Textile Processors (P) ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: 2008(221)ELT38(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. These appeals are filed against the final orders 993 & 994 of 2005 dated 11.07.2005 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai. 2. The facts in nutshell are as follows:The respondents M/s.Rajalakshmi Textile Processors (P) Ltd., Erode and M/s. S.S.M. Processing Mills Ltd., Komarapalayam are engaged in the processing of cotton fabrics and man made fabrics falling under CETH 52 and 55 of schedule of CETA, 1985 and cleared the same on payment of duty under Bond. The assessees have obtained fabrics from outsiders for carrying out several processing work on job work basis and were availing deemed credit in respect of the inputs in terms of Rule 11 of erstwhile Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 read with Notification No. 53/2001 CE(NT) dated 29.06.2001 and Notification No. 6/2002 CE(NT) dated 01.03.2002 at specified rates and utilised the credit for payment of duty on the clearances of the processed fabrics for home consumpt...
Tag this Judgment!The Member Secretary, Cmda Vs. A. Vijayaraghavan,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ201
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 6006 of 1998 dated 12.8.1998, allowing the writ petition filed by the respondents 1 to 3 herein.2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ appeal are as follows:(a) The writ petitioners/Respondents 1 to 3 herein are joint owners of the land comprised in T.S. No. 8/9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 20, 21 and 22 bearing Door No.12, Inner Ring Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai, measuring an extent of 4,350 Sq.Mtrs. The said land was classified as Primary Residential Use Zone. The respondents 1 to 3 applied for re-classification as Commercial Use Zone for the purpose of constructing a hotel consisting of 96 rooms with six car parking areas. (b) The appellant herein sent a reply stating that the re-classification request will be considered subject to the respondents 1 to 3 executing an undertaking bond to meet the additional facilities required such as connection of water and sewer...
Tag this Judgment!Ponni Gounder Vs. the Superintending Engineer, T.N.E.B. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC467; (2008)1MLJ108
K. Mohan Ram, J.1. The second plaintiff in O.S. No. 3328 of 1981 on the file of the First Additional District Munsif Court, Coimbatore, who succeeded in the suit, but lost before the lower appellate court in A.S. No. 36 of 1992 is the appellant in the above second appeal. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the suit. 2. The suit was filed seeking for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from disconnecting the agricultural electricity service connection of the plaintiffs on the ground that the plaintiffs are disputing the correctness of the amounts in the bills and the amounts stated in the bills are excessive and inaccurate. 3. The suit was contested by the first defendant by filing a written statement, inter-alia contending as follows:The suit is unsustainable both in law and facts; the bills issued represent the actual consumption charges and no surcharge or any other penal charges were levied; if really the plaintiffs have any i...
Tag this Judgment!M. Suresh Vs. Mrs. B. Sumathi and
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Mad18; 2007(5)CTC330; (2007)5MLJ1388
D. Murugesan, J.1. The present Original Side Appeal raises an important question as to whether the High Court would have jurisdiction to entertain an Original Petition filed under Sections 300, 370 to 372 of the Indian Succession Act read with Order XXV Rule 6 of the Original Side Rules for issue of succession certificate.2. Factual matrix leading to the appeal is as follows:One P. Mahalingam died intestate on 19.3.2002 at Thiruveedhiamman Koil Street, Peria Koluthuvan Cherry, Paraniputhur & Post, Iyyappanthangal, Chennai. He left the following persons as his Class I legal heirs:S. No. Particulars of the Class-I Relationship withlegal heirs the deceased-------------------------------------------------------------1 Devi (2nd respondent) Widow2 Mrs. B. Sumathi (1st respondent) Daughter3 M. Suresh (Appellant) SonThe deceased was entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 87,333/- towards gratuity and group insurance from his employer namely, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, P...
Tag this Judgment!Correspondent,secretary and Managing Trustee, Salem Sowdeswari College ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: (2008)1MLJ312
R. Regupathi, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 28.2.2003 made in W.P. No. 10192 of 1996, wherein the appellant college was directed to settle the monetary benefits in terms of salary and other emoluments to the first respondent till the end of the academic year 1996-97, as he was not permitted to avail the benefit of re-employment, as conferred in G.O.Ms. No. 281 dated 13.2.1981, wherein it is made clear that the teacher, who attained 58 years in the middle of the academic year shall be permitted to continue till the end of that academic year.2. The right to continue on re-employment till the end of academic year conferred on the teachers working in the schools either Government or private, both minority or non-minority, has already been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 1179 of 1993 (S. Sundaram v. Secretary, C.S.I. Diocese of Madras), and the SLP preferred against the same was also dismissed. The ratio laid down by the Supreme Court has bee...
Tag this Judgment!The Regional Director, Southern Regional Business Centre, Oil and Natu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: (2008)IILLJ1001Mad
R. Banumathi, J.1. The Writ Petitioners seek issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the ONGC to forbear from deducting any amount pursuant to its circular No. 40 dated 18.06.1998, towards Post Retirement and Death in service Benefit Scheme [for short, 'PRBS'], from 16.11.1995 from the salary of the petitioners.2. Background facts:The controversy in these Writ Petitions and Writ Appeals relate to PRBS, which is managed and controlled by a Trust as per the Trust Deed dated 23.10.1991. Petitioners are Members of Association of Scientific and Technical Officers [ASTO]. In order to keep healthy relationship with employees and for their welfare, after various discussion, ONGC evolved PRBS w.e.f. 01.04.1990 as a welfare scheme. The scheme provides for benefits to the employee or their dependants in the event of permanent total disablement or death, over and above the amount payable under the Workmen's Compensation Act.3. The draft scheme was approved by the Government of India on 18.09.1991...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by Its Secretary to the Government ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(5)CTC471; (2008)1MLJ117
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The issue involved in these writ appeals is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 23.2.2007, made in W.P. No. 28461 of 2003, wherein the Division Bench, following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. Krishnamurthy reported in : AIR2006SC1622 , has passed an order to the following effect:.2. Similar matter came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. P. Krishnamurthy reported in 2006 4 L.W.635, therein, while the Court upheld the validity of Rule 38A, which vests the exclusive right to quarry sand in the State Government and that part of Rule 38A, which purports to terminate quarrying leases/ permissions, observed as follows:26. In regard to mining leases subsisting as on 2.10.2003, we have read down Rule 38A as terminating such leases in terms of the contract (lease deeds) by six months, without assigning cause and without any liability to pay compensat...
Tag this Judgment!Ennore Port Limited Vs. Skanska Cementation India Limited and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)ARBLR598(Madras)
Prabha Sridevan, J.1. According to the petitioner, the award suffers from illegality and the arbitrators have exceeded the parameters of the power and have committed misconduct and, therefore, the award deserves to be set aside.2. The petitioner called for competent offers by open tender for construction of port site access roads and bridges for the proposed Coal Port Project (Contract No. ECPP-C2). Trafalgar House Construction (India) Ltd. submitted their offer. The respondent is the successor-in-interest of Trafalgar House Construction (India) Ltd. Haskoning Royal Dutch Consulting Engineers and Architects of Netherlands were engaged as project consultants for planning, design and implementation of the project. The petitioner is the successor-in-interest of Madras Port Trust. There was a formal agreement incorporating the letter of acceptance, clarifications, specifications, terms and conditions and was executed on 28.06.1996. The work was to be completed within 15 months from the dat...
Tag this Judgment!A. Karuppaiah Vs. the Director General, Government of India, Ministry ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-25-2007
Reported in: (2007)6MLJ1368
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. In all these 15 Writ Petitions, the petitioners are all wait listed persons kept in the list of persons eligible for employment assistance on account of the death of their near relative in harness while working the employment of the second respondent factory. Since during the wait period, their turn for employment never arose, by the impugned order, they were informed that there was remote possibility of their getting employment as the list had lapsed. They were also further informed that the family pension, terminal benefits were received from the factory was substantial, there was no necessity to grant any employment assistance on compassionate grounds. It is this order, which is under challenge.2. All these Writ Petitions was admitted on 16.2.2006. The respondents have also filed counter affidavits. In each of the counter affidavit, the second respondent had stated the details of the family members of the deceased workman as well as the quantum of the benefits ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »