Chennai Court February 2008 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.
N. Ramesh Vs. Sibi Madan Gabriel,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ255
P.K. Misra, J.1. The dispute relates to the question of appointment to the post of Principal in 'Film and Television.' Institute of Tamil Nadu, hereinafter referred to as 'the Institute' in brief.2. The two combatants in the on going legal battle are Mr. Sibi Hadan Gabriel, petitioner in the Writ Petition No. 36307 of 2004 and Mr. N. Ramesh, the Respondent No. 4 in such writ petition. The post of the Principal m such Institute, which was lying vacant for a considerable length of time, was filled up by the appointment of fourth respondent as per order dated 6.12.2004. Such appointment is being challenged in the writ petition.For convenience, the parties are described in the manner they have been arrayed in W.P. No. 36307 of 2004.3. The factual background is as follows:The petitioner was appointed temporarily as Lecturer in Acting in the Institute by order dated 26.5.1982 and his service was regularised retrospectively with effect from the date, of joining as per order dated 20.2.1992. T...
Hanu Reddy Realty India Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Director, Mr. C. Suresh ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2008
Reported in: III(2008)BC190; 2008(1)CTC721; (2008)2MLJ896
ORDERK.K. Sasidharan, J.1. These civil revision petitions are directed against the order dated 81.12.2W5 in M.A. No. 124 of 2095, whereby the Debts Recover? Appellate Tribunal modified the order dated 28.07.2095 in Appeal No. 2/2005 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai, with respect to the property in item No. 1 in the auction notice held on 18.11.2004 (C.R.P. No. 1842 of 2005) and the order dated 20.02.2006 in I.N.No.315/2005and I.A.No.91/2006, whereby the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal directed to take steps to auction the property in item No. 3 of the auction notice (C.R.P. No. 518 of 2006).2. W.P. No. 536 of 2006 has been filed by the defaulter for issue of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the orders dated 28.07.2005 in Appeal No. 2/2005 as well as the order dated 01.12.2005 in M.A. No. 124 of 2005 which is the subject matter of C.R.P. No. 1842 of 2005 and to quash the same.3. For the purpose of appreciating the facts in all the three matters, the factual detail...
N. Kannaki Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Principal Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ869
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioner was in the judicial service of the State and was functioning as Principal District Munsif, Poonamallee, (Civil Judge, Jr. Division). She having attained the age of 50 years, her case alongwith others was reviewed under Fundamental Rules 56(2) (hereinafter referred to as 'FR' for short). The administrative committee of the High Court, having found the petitioner not fit for continuance in service on attaining age of 50 years, the matter was placed before the Full Court of Madras High Court, which decided to retire her from service in public interest. The recommendation having accepted and communicated, the petitioner has challenged G.O. 2 (D) No. 586 dated 3rd Oct., 2006, issued from the Home (Courts I.A.) Department of the State of Tamil Nadu 'by the order of the Governor'.2. According to the petitioner, she was a practising advocate at Mayiladuthurai for about 13 years, applied for the post of Civil Judge, Jr. Division, in the Tamil Nadu Sta...
The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M. Gani and Co.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2008
Reported in: [2008]301ITR381(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 942/Mds/2005 dated 30.11.2006. The relevant assessment year is 2001-02.2. The assessee is a manufacturer of garments and fancy items and exporter. The assessee filed its return of income on 29.10.2001 for the relevant assessment year 2001-2002 claiming deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') on export turn over ignoring the results of domestic turn over. The Assessing Officer after going through the facts that the assessee while computing the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act has taken into consideration only the turn over of the export division for the purpose of total turn over, has made a composite turn over of both the export turn over as well as domestic turn over and accordingly re-computed the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. Aggrieved by that order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the...
Corporation of Chennai Rep. by Its Commissioner Vs. D. Kuppan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ394
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The Corporation of Chennai (for brevity, 'the Corporation') has filed these appeals against the common order of the learned Single Judge dated 26.3.2005 made in W.P. No. 6683 to 6701, 6748, 8157 to 8160 of 2004 filed by the respective 1st respondents in these appeals (for brevity, 'the contesting respondents').2. In the writ petitions, the Corporation was the sole respondent. At the time of admission of these appeals, the First Bench of this Court, by order dated 9.3.2007, suo motu, impleaded the Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Chennai as the party respondent in these appeals.3.1. The contesting respondents are occupants of the tenements at Nariangadu, Egmore, Chennai. Out of 66 tenements available at Naraingadu, Egmore, Chennai, 17 tenements are occupied by Corporation employees, 2 tenements are occupied by Chennai Metro Water Supply and Sewerage Board Employees, 43 tenements are occupied Fire Servic...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Southern Petrochemical Industries Corpn ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2008
Reported in: [2008]301ITR255(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 141/Mds/2004, dated 13.10.2006. The relevant assessment year is 2000-01.2. The assessee-Company filed return of income for the assessment year 2000-2001 on 28.11.2000 declaring a gross total income of Rs. 18,98,72,520 and after setting off an unabsorbed depreciation from the assessment year 1994-1995, arrived at a net taxable income of Rs. Nil. The assessee inter alia claimed deduction of expenditure incurred on issue of debentures and collection of fixed deposits as revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer disallowed the same, as also the depreciation on standby machinery. Aggrieved by the assessment orders, the assessee filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who allowed the same based on the orders passed for the earlier years on the same issues. The Revenue took the matter on further appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Incom...
Ammani Ammal Vs. Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2008
Reported in: III(2008)BC229
K.K. Sasidharan, J.1. In these Writ Petitions, the petitioner has impugned the order of the seventh respondent dated 14.3.2007 in M.A. No. 12of 2007 confirming the order of the sixth respondent dated 4.1.2006 in I.A. No. 504 of 2006 in T.A. No. 729 of 2002 (W.P. No. 15155 of 2007) and the order dated 14.3.2007 in M.A. No. 13 of 2007 confirming the order of the sixth respondent dated 4.1.2006 in I.A. No. 505 of 2006 in T.A. No. 729 of 2002 (W.P. No. 15156 of 2007).2. The factual matrix necessary for disposal of the Writ Petitions are as below:The first respondent herein preferred O.A. No. 277 of 2000 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai against the petitioner herein and respondents 2 to 4 for a decree directing them to pay a sum of Rs. 1,15,81,537.77 along with subsequent interest and the said O.A. was later transferred to Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai and renumbered as O.A. No. 834 of 2001. From the records, it is found that Vakalat was filed on behalf of all the defenda...
Kanagam and ors. Vs. the Commissioner, Coimbatore Corporation and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ185
Elipe Dharma Rao, J.1. The above Writ Appeal is directed against the common order of the learned single Judge dated 20.07.2005 made in W.P. No. 18228 of 1994 along with two other writ petitions.2. The case of the writ petitioners was that the property situated in T.S. No. 936, T.P. Scheme, No. 8 Race Course Road, Coimbatore, originally belonged to one Thandavan Chettiar and that by separate sale deeds executed in the year 1975, the various plots laid out in the said survey number were sold to them by the said Thandavan Chettiar and the said lay out also provided for a passage of 20 feet width. While the said private passage belongs to the petitioners, who purchased different plots sold out by the late Thandavan Chettiar with their rights to use it as a private passage to approach their respective plots from the main road, respondents 5 and 6 got a plan sanctioned in their favour by the Corporation of Coimbatore by allegedly showing this private passage which is adjacent to their proper...
Chrome Leather Company Ltd., Rep. by Its Manager, A. Selvakumar Vs. th ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: (2008)4MLJ361
ORDERP. Jyothimani, J.1. The writ petitioner has filed W.P. No. 33248 of 2087, challenging the order of the first respondent, District Collector, Kancheepuram dated 26.02.2007 and for direction against the first respondent to cancel the legal heir certificate dated 05.08.2001 issued by the second respondent, Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk in favour of the third respondent, and W.P. No. 33249 of 2087 challenging the legal heir certificate issued by the second respondent, Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk in favour of the third respondent.2. The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 and the management of the Company was vested with one George Alexander Chambers, who established the same. According to the petitioner Company, the said George Alexander Chambers has executed a Will converting his entire business into single limited liability, by sale of assets to the company the consideration being allotment of ordinary and preferential shares of the Company. After the...
Easy Weld Electrodes (P) Ltd. Rep. by Director Thiru L. Jebaraj Vs. th ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: (2008)IILLJ893Mad; (2008)3MLJ150
ORDERF.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the proceedings of the respondent dated 9.1.2006, which is a show cause notice for issuance of warrant of arrest, under Rule 73(1) of Income Tax Act 1961, read with Section 45-C to 45-I of the ESI Act, 1948.2. The issue relates to non-payment of ESI contribution for the period from 1.5.1994 to 31.3.2001. According to the petitioner, contributions were duly paid on 13.12.2006.3. The learned Counsel for the respondent states that before issuance of the show cause notice for arrest, an order under Section 45A of the ESI Act has been passed and that if at all the petitioner is aggrieved, they will have to work out their remedy under Section 75 of the ESI Act. Learned Counsel would however point out that the said order under Section 45A was passed as early as on 24.2.2003.4. As rightly contended by the learned Counsel for the respondent, unless the petitioner challenges the said order of determination ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »