Chennai Court January 2008 Judgments
Canara Bank by Its General Manager Vs. the Presiding Officer, Industri ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-2008
Reported in: (2008)2MLJ414
S.R. Singharavelu, J.1. The writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 14.12.2001 in W.P. No. 1313 of 1996.2. The case of the appellant/petitioner is that the second respondent employee who was working as a Shroff, Uthamapalayam Branch of the Bank was charge sheeted for alleged misconduct within the meaning of Chapter-XI Regulation 3 Clause(I) of the Canara Bank Service Code. The crux of the charge is that the second respondent by making wrongful entries in the record, had caused cash shortage of Rs. 50,000/- and had misappropriated the said amount. The criminal complaint which was filed against him ultimately ended in acquittal by order dated 16.12.1988. Subsequently, disciplinary proceedings commenced and charge memo was issued on 31.01.1989. An enquiry was conducted and on the basis of the Enquiry Officer's findings and recommendations, the Deputy General Manager being the Disciplinary Authority dismissed the second respondent from service. Aggrieved...
Tag this Judgment!Ganga Foundry Rep. by Its Managing Partner K. Sama Naidu Vs. Ganga Eng ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-2008
Reported in: LC2008(2)351
S. Tamilvanan, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Decree, dated 08.01.1996 made in O.S. No. 93 of 1991 on the file of the First Additional District Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore.2. The plaintiff, M/s. Ganga Foundry represented by its Managing Partner had filed the suit against M/s. Ganga Engineering Works, by its proprietor, the first defendant. According to the plaintiff, M/s. Ganga Foundry is a registered partnership concern, dealing in the manufacture and selling of electric motors and pump sets, power driven pump sets mono block pump sets and borewell submersible pump sets for about 25 years and also got registered trade mark consist of two letters 'GF' within a circle and the word 'GANGA' in capital letters below as the registered trade mark and got exclusive rights to use the trade mark and also obtained ISI quality certificate for its products. According to the plaintiff during February 1990, it was brought to the notice of the plainti...
Tag this Judgment!Keyaram Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-2008
Reported in: (2008)215CTR(Mad)456; [2008]300ITR118(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The appeal is filed by formulating the following questions of law:1. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the income derived by the appellant from leasing of the 'commercial property' is not business income and has to be assessed as income from property?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal, having found that the transaction is a business activity was justified in concluding that the income has to be assessed as 'income from property'?3. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in sustaining the stand of the respondent on the assessment of lease income under head 'Property' even though it was not a case of letting 'simpliciter' and on the contrary letting with amenities and services, warranting computation under the head 'Business' granting deduction of expenses incurred?4. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in sustaining the stand of the respondent on the assessment of lease income under head 'Property'...
Tag this Judgment!indira Iron and Steel Works and ors. Vs. Age Impex International Inc. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-29-2008
Reported in: IV(2008)BC12
M. Venugopal, J.1. The O.S.A. No. 352 of 2001 is filed by the appellants/plaintiffs/applicants as against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge on 30.6.2000 in dismissing the Application No. 2485 of 1998 in C.S. No. 140 of 1986.2. The appellants/plaintiffs/applicants filed C.S. No. 140 of 1986 praying for a judgment and decree passed against all the defendants or such of the defendants as this Court finds liable to pay Rs. 15,92,414.88 to the plaintiff with interest at 20% per annum from now till date of decree and thereafter at 6% from the date of decree till the date of realisation and for costs.The suit in C.S. No. 140 of 1986 filed by the appellants/plaintiffs/applicants was dismissed for default, on account of the appellants/plaintiffs not taking any steps.3. The appellants/plaintiffs filed Application No. 2485 of 1998 in C.S. No. 140 of 1986 praying to set aside the order of dismissal of the C.S. No. 140 of 1986 on 10.11.1997 and the same was dismissed by this Court on 30...
Tag this Judgment!P. Sivachandran Vs. M.P. Purushotham
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)CTC409; (2008)2MLJ427
ORDERM. Venugopal, J.1. The Civil Revision Petitioner is the tenant/respondent before the learned Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority.2. The revision petitioner/tenant has filed the present Civil Revision Petition before this Court aggrieved against the orders passed by the learned Appellate Authority viz., 7th Judge, Court of Small Causes (full in-charge), Chennai in R.C.A. No. 1108 of 2002 dated 21.07.2003 in R.C.O.P. No. 1148 of 2001.3. The respondent/appellant/petitioner/landlord has filed R.C.O.P. No. 1148 of 2001 on the file of learned Rent Controller viz., XIV Court of Small Causes, Chennai under Section 10(2)(i) of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act 23 of 1973 for wilful default against the revision petitioner/respondent/tenant, praying for an order of eviction and to deliver vacant possession.4. The learned Rent Controller viz., XIV Court of Small Causes, Chennai in R.C.O.P. No. 1148 of 2001 on 04.02.2002 has held that the respondent/tenant has not commi...
Tag this Judgment!T.S.T. Kaznavi Vs. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Rep. by Its Chairman,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2008
Reported in: (2008)2MLJ703
ORDERP. Jyothimani, J.1. The writ petitioner is the owner of the vacant landed property to an extent of 1.80 acres comprised in Survey No. 5/2 at No. 117, Pandur Village, Chengelpet Taluk, Kancheepuram District, having purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 30.11.2006 and the patta in respect of the property stood in the name of his vendor Mrs. Vijayalakshmi in Patta No. 409, the petitioner has applied for transfer of patta in his name. According to the petitioner, right from 1939, the predecessors in title of the petitioner have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the property. On 16.11.2007, some contract labourers employed by the Assistant Divisional Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Guduvancherry, third respondent herein, have brought building materials and entered into the lands of the petitioner and started digging and made excavation, in order to erect huge transmission high-tension electric line tower. On 19.11.2007, the petitioner has sent a tel...
Tag this Judgment!Nadadur Varadhan Vs. Deputy Director of Enforcement, Enforcement Direc ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)CTC198; (2008)4MLJ738
ORDERP. Jyothimani, J.1. This writ petition is filed for direction against the respondents to de-freeze the petitioner's N.R.I. Account maintained by the 4th respondent, State Bank of India, N.R.I. Branch, Chennai-600 002 and consequently to permit the petitioner to operate the said account.2. The petitioner who is an Indian origin, is a citizen of U.S.A., living in the city of Santa Monica, California State for the past 20 years and he is a Management Consultant. According to him, he came to India in 1994, particularly to Chennai and during his visit he met his cousin one Sampath, a Chartered Accountant by profession, who was keen in promoting the game of Basketball in Chennai. The petitioner being interested in the said game, along with the said Sampath, floated a business by which the sponsorship of multinational companies was obtained for bringing professional teams from USA to play the game in various places in India, especially in Chennai at the newly constructed Stadium for Bask...
Tag this Judgment!Palanisamy and anr. Vs. Milka Nutrients P. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2008
Reported in: [2008]144CompCas619(Mad); (2008)6MLJ1081
R. Banumathi, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order/interim order dated January 11, 2008, passed by the Additional Principal Bench, Company Law Board, Chennai, in C.P. No. 5 of 2008.2. The dispute is in respect of 'Milka Nutrients' incorporated as a company under the name and style of M/s. New Hope Food Industries P. Ltd., which is engaged in the business of manufacturing and supplying of cakes under the brand name 'Milka Wonder Cake'. Alleging acts of mismanagement and oppression, the appellants, who are also the directors of the company has preferred C.P. No. 5 of 2008. In the said company petition, the appellants sought to restrain the respondents from conducting and holding the proposed extraordinary general meeting of the company scheduled to be held on January 12, 2008. The Company Law Board ('CLB') by its order dated January 11, 2008, had granted the liberty to the first respondent-company to convene the extraordinary general meeting after serving notice to the appellant...
Tag this Judgment!Superintending Engineer Vs. Murali Raja
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2008
Reported in: (2008)5MLJ1337
G. Rajasuria, J.1. This appeal is focussed as against the Judgment and Decree dated 27.04.2007, passed in A.S. No. 23 of 2006, by the Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar at Srivilliputhur, in setting aside the dismissal Judgment and decree dated 26.07.2006 emerged in O.S. No. 20 of 2004 on the file of Sub Court, Virudhunagar and in remanding the suit to the Sub Court, Virudhunagar for fresh disposal.2. The parties, for convenience sake, are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status before the trial Court.3. Broadly but briefly, precisely but narratively, the case of the plaintiff as stood exposited from the plaint could be portrayed thus:The plaintiff filed the suit O.S. No. 20 of 2004 in the Sub Court, Virudhunagar, seeking mandatory injunction and permanent injunction on the main ground that the Electricity Board Authorities without adhering to the procedures and throwing to winds the principles of natural justice proceeded with the enquiry based on the Second sho...
Tag this Judgment!H.N. Umashankar Vs. State Bank of Mysore, P and S Division, Bangalore ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: (2008)2MLJ803
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This revision application has been preferred by the petitioner against order dated 12th Dec., 2007, passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, (hereinafter referred to as 'DRAT') in I.A. No. 916/07 in M.A. No. 52/07. By the said order, the appellant before the DRAT has been directed to deposit cost of Rs. 10,000/- as awarded by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bangalore, (hereinafter referred to as 'DRT') by the order impugned before DRAT in favour of the respondent, State Bank of Mysore (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bank') on or before the specified date.2. The main plea taken by the petitioner is that the DRAT has no jurisdiction to direct the petitioner/appellant to deposit the cost as imposed by DRT for determination of appeal or for extension of interim order of stay.On the other hand, according to the bank, the DRT as also the DRAT has power to make such order to prevent abuse of its process and to secure the ends of justice.3. The admit...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »