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.
Bajaj Auto Ltd., State of Maharashtra Rep. by S. Ravikumar Vs. Tvs Mot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2008
Reported in: (2008)ILLJ726Mad; LC2008(1)217; 2008(36)PTC417(Mad)
P. Jyothimani, J.1. The plaintiff in C.S. No. 979 of 2007 is the defendant in C.S. No. 1111 of 2007.2. C.S. No. 1111 of 2007 is a suit filed under Section 108 of the Patents Act, 1970 for the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the plaintiff's patent No. 195904 and/or from using the technology/invention described in the said patent and/or manufacturing, marketing, selling, offering for sale or exporting 2/3 wheelers, including the proposed 125-CC FLAME motorcycle containing an internal combustion engine or any internal combustion engine or product which infringes the plaintiff's patent No. 195904, claiming of damages for infringement of patent to the extent of Rs. 10,50,000/- etc.Pending the said suit, the plaintiff therein, namely Bajaj Auto Limited has filed O.A. 1357 of 2007 praying for an order of temporary injunction restraining the respondent from in any manner infringing the applicant's patent No. 195904 and/or from using the technology/ invention described in the said ...
Rajamanikkam, Vs. Abdul Rashid (Died) Represented by His Power Agent W ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2008
Reported in: (2008)5MLJ1083(NULL)
M. Jaichandren, J.1. This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree of the Additional Sub Court, Mayiladuthurai, dated 21.1.1999, made in A.S. No. 62 of 1998, confirming the judgment and decree of the District Munsif Court, Sirkali, dated 7.11.1996, made in O.S. No. 404 of 1995.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they have been arrayed in the original suit.The plaintiffs, who are the respondents in the present second appeal, had filed a suit in O.S. No. 404 of 1995, before the District Munsif Court, Sirkali, praying for the relief of permanent injunction to restrain the defendants and their men from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property by the plaintiff and the alternative relief of recovery of possession and for mesne profits stating that the suit property is a land having an extent of 0.56 cents in R.S. No. 259/1,(Now R.S. No. 259-1-B), in Koothiyampettai Village, Sirkali Taluk. The suit property ...
P. Sekar S/O. Ponnan Vs. the Registrar, Tamil Nadu Administrative Trib ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)CTC23; (2008)5MLJ646
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. The present writ petition is directed against the order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' in O.A. No. 1608 of 2003 dated 20.11.2003. Such Original Application was filed by the present petitioner challenging the order of termination from service, which was ultimately dismissed without granting any relief.2. The facts giving rise to filing of the Original Application and the present writ petition are as follows:The petitioner was working as Flock Man in the Animal Husbandry Department since 1983. At that time, the petitioner had not passed SSLC examination. Subsequently, the petitioner appeared in SSLC examination as a private candidate during 1988 and furnished the mark sheet, wherein it was indicated that he had passed all subjects in SSLC examination. Thereafter, on the basis of such certificate, he applied for the post of Veterinary Livestock Inspector and was selected on 20.4.2000 and was sent for training an...
Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. Rep. by Its Chairman Vs. N.L.C. Indco ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR731]; (2008)IILLJ897Mad; (2008)3MLJ1070
S. Palanivelu, J.1. Both these writ appeals are directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 15.5.2002, made in W.P. No. 8 of 1996. The said writ petition was filed by N.L.C. INDCO SERVE Thozhilalar Uzhiyar Sangam, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the first respondent therein viz. the Neyveli Lignite Corporation, its men, officers, agents and servants from absorbing any contract labour or any other employee either permanently or temporarily in the first respondent Corporation without following the seniority on the basis of the date of entry in Corporation either as a contract labour or directly and consequently direct the first respondent to absorb and regularise the members of the petitioner union as employees of the first respondent Corporation with all monetary and service benefits with effect from the date of entry into service in the first respondent Corporation either as a contract labour or otherwise.2. For the sake of convenience, the status of the...
Jmc Educational Trust Vs. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2008
Reported in: (2008)217CTR(Mad)263; 2008[10]STR436; (2008)14VST307(Mad)
ORDERS. Nagamuthu, J.1. The petitioner is a trust, registered under the Indian Trust Act, 1882, and is engaged in promoting education and conducting classes to the students under the Distance Education Programme of various Universities such as Tamil Nadu Open University, Mother Theresa University and Allagappa University. For imparting education to the students, the petitioner's trust collects prescribed fee from the students and a part of the said amount is paid to the university and the balance amount is retained by the petitioner's trust.2. While so, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy-I issued a show cause notice to the petitioner by his proceedings in C. No. V/ST/30/ 10/2006-ST-Adj dated June 7, 2006 calling upon the petitioner's trust to pay a total sum of Rs. 71,200 towards service tax of Rs. 70,953 and education cess of Rs. 247 for the period from July 2003 to March 2005. The petitioner submitted his explanation for the same stating that the service which is re...
Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Vs. A. Ka ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: (2008)IIILLJ941Mad; (2008)3MLJ347
S.R. Singharavelu, J.1. The writ appeal is directed against the order dated 1.11.1995 of the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 8015 of 1985, in dismissing the writ petition filed by the Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Tirunelveli, that was filed to quash the orders of the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Appellate Side, under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act, Tirunelveli (second respondent), made in TNSE A. No. (M) 4/83 in 18/78 dated 31.3.1984.2. That order of the Appellate Authority was made at the instance of the appeal filed by the first Respondent viz., A. Kalyanasundaram. That appeal was filed under Section 41(2) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act, 1947, against the order of the appellant herein.3. In that appeal, it was contended by the first respondent that he was employed as a Bill Clerk in the Management's retail shop at Kayalpattinam from 14.3.1975, that two more persons also were employed in the shop, that the Senior Reg...
S. Manivannan Vs. Director of School Education and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: (2008)5MLJ642
ORDERN. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. Prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order of the first respondent dated 23.5.2005 communicated by the third respondent by proceeding dated 11.5.2005 and direct the respondents to approve the promotion of the petitioner as Headmaster of the 4th respondent School from 1.9.1995 with all consequential benefits.2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are as follows:(a) The 4th respondent School was established and administered by Thirumuruga Kirubananda Variyar Educational Sangam from the year 1990. The said school was granted recognition with a condition that grant-in-aid will not be given for a period of three years. The Sangam accepted the said condition and appointed teaching and non-teaching staff in the 4th respondent School.(b) The petitioner was appointed as B.T. Assistant on 1.8.1990. The person, who served as Headmaster in the 4th respondent School was relieved from his post due to his inability and in the said place ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri A. Chandran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: (2008)215CTR(Mad)248; [2008]306ITR274(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. In all these cases, the common question of law raised for consideration is:Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that surcharge is not applicable to block assessments if the search took place prior to introduction of the proviso to Section 113 with effect from 1.6.2002?2. In all these cases, the respondents were duly served. The first tax case in T.C. No. 2622 of 2006 is taken up as a typical case. In that case, there was a search under Section 132 in the residential premises of the assessee on 22.6.1999. A block assessment was framed for the block period 1.4.1989 to 20.8.1989, and the block assessment order was passed on 27.8.2001. The assessing officer levied a surcharge at 10 percent on the tax payable on the block assessment. The appeal preferred by the assessee before the Commissioner of Tax (Appeals) ended in dismissal. However, on further appeal to the Tribunal, the Tribunal following the decision of Speci...
Union of India (Uoi) Rep. by the Secretary to Government of India, Min ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: (2008)4MLJ424
Elipe Dharma Rao, J.1. The first respondent herein was working as Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Hosur-I and he was due to retire from service on 31.10.2001. However, a week prior to his superannuation, by an order dated 25.10.2001, he was placed under suspension and subsequently, he was allowed to retire w.e.f. 31.10.2001, subject to the disciplinary proceedings. Thereupon, a charge memo. with five articles of charges was issued to him under Rule 9 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 read with Rules 14 and 15 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, by the proceedings dated 23.7.2003. All the five charges are inter-linked and the sum and substance of the same is that the first respondent, while functioning as Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Hosur-I during 2000-2001, referred seven claims for rebate filed by M/s. Premier Mills Ltd., Hosur, for pre-audit as the rebate claims were over Rs. 5 lakhs value. On being objected to and intimated by the Audit that the claims are not eligible fo...
Palaniappa Sago Factory Vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: (2009)24VST248(Mad)
ORDERPrabha Sridevan, J.1. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the assessment order was filed beyond the time prescribed under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 and beyond the power of the appellate authority to condone the delay and therefore the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable since it was filed beyond time. Against that the present writ petition has been filed.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the assessment notice was not given and straight-away the assessment order was passed and therefore it is a ground that will go to the root of the matter and in those circumstances this Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned Counsel further submitted that though there is a Division Bench judgment in W.P. No. 10908 of 2002 [Reported as A. Radhakrishnan v. Registrar, TNTST [2005] 142 STC 533 (Mad)] by which the Division Bench dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the appellate aut...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »