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.
Lilly Stanislaus Vs. the Chairman, T.N.E.B.,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ160
ORDERP. Jyothimani, J.1. The writ petition is filed for direction against the respondents to pay an amount of Rs. 3 lakhs by way of compensation to the petitioner for the death of her husband.2. The petitioner is the wife of one Stanislaus, who was working in Sri Kutchi Milan (Madras) Charitable Trust, Purasawalkam and they have a married daughter apart from one un-married son Ruben and un-married daughter Jaculine. On 14.06.1996, in the early morning at 5.00 a.m. the petitioner's husband went to procure milk from the nearby Aavin Milk Booth. On the night there was heavy rain and when her husband was passing in Anna Street, near the tea shop, he had to step on the live wire, snapped from electrical post No. 146 and he was thrown down due to electrocution. One boy by name Nataraj, tried to pull him and he was also electrocuted and it was after two hours electric -supply was disconnected and in the meantime, the petitioner's husband died on the spot.2(a). A complaint was lodged to the Su...
i. Sivasubramanian Vs. Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)CTC160; (2008)3MLJ1402
ORDERP. Jyothimani, J.1. Heard Mr. G. Vasudevan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. L.S.M. Hasan Fizal, learned Government Advocate appearing for the first and second respondents and Mr. T.R. Rajaraman learned Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent.2. This writ petition is directed against the order of the first respondent dated 06.10.05 by which the first respondent by allowing the Revision petition filed by the third respondent has set aside the election of the petitioner as President of Thovalai Channel Neerienai Payanpaduthuvoor Sangam (Thovalai Channel Water Users Association).3. According to the petitioner he is having irrigation land in Kulasekaramputhoor Village in Survey Nos. 324/4, 326/10, 326/12 and 336/3 and therefore he was qualified to be a candidate for the post of President for Thovalai Channel Neerienai Payanpaduthuvoor Sangam as per the Tamil Nadu Farmers' Management of Irrigation System Act, 2000. As per the said Act, the Public Works Department has ...
K. Jayachandran, Deputy Inspector of Survey and Land Records Vs. State ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)CTLJ465(Mad); (2008)3MLJ390
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels appearing for the parties.2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 1020 of 2000. Such Original Application was filed by the present petitioner for quashing the order dated 22.11.1999 passed by the Director of Survey & Land Records, Chennai.3. The petitioner was working as Sub-Inspector of Survey in Thondiarpet during the year 1984. At that time he was also put in charge of distributing flood reliefs to the slum dwellers. On the complaints received regarding alleged malpractice and irregularities, initially before the Tribunal, for disciplinary proceedings, an enquiry was initiated as D.E. No. 44 of 1989. However, such charge memo was challenged by the petitioner by filing O.A. No. 3339 of 1991. By order dated 24.12.1992, the charge memo was set aside and the disciplinary authority was directed to consider the matter afresh. At that stage, the Assistant Direct...
Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation Limited Rep. by Its Corporat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: [2008]143CompCas39(Mad); (2008)3MLJ1359; [2009]91SCL253(Mad)
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Corporation') against order dated 22nd Dec., 2006, passed by learned Company Judge in C.P. No. 213/01. By the said order, learned Judge closed and rejected the company petition preferred by the appellant Under Section 433(e), (f), 434(1)(a) and 439(1)(b) of the Companies Act r/w Rule 11 (a) of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959.2. The facts as appears from the pleadings shows that Sterling Holiday Resorts India Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as 'Company') approached the appellant for a sum of Rs. 500 lakhs. As per loan agreement dated 6th Nov., 1996, loan amount was to be repaid within a period of two years in six equal quarterly instalments with interest @ 24% p.a., and additional interest of 3% p.a., on the total amount defaulted. The loan was acquired by personal guarantees of some of the Directors of the company and the shares of some of the sharehold...
Mr. A. Ramamurthy Vs. the Income Tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: (2009)222CTR(Mad)414
Elipe Dharma Rao, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P. No. 14024 of 2004, dated 24.8.2006. 2. The writ petition was filed stating that the petitioner/appellant, who is an income tax assessee, availed the scheme called 'Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme' for the Assessment Year 1985-86. Pursuant to the same, he paid the amount determined as tax arrears and obtained a certificate to that effect. Later the authorities have reopened the assessment for the Assessment Year 1985-86 and directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 4,98,187/- as per the order of the respondent, dated 03.2.2004. The said writ petition was filed seeking to quash the said order, dated 03.2.2004 and to consequently direct the respondent to drop the proceedings under Section 155 of the Income Tax Act. 3. The learned Single Judge, taking into consideration the fact that against the abovesaid order, dated 03.2.2004, the petitioner preferred an appeal which is pending before ...
P.G. Foils Limited Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission, Additional Be ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: (2008)215CTR(Mad)537; [2008]302ITR331(Mad)
P.D. Dinakaran, J.1. The unsuccessful writ petitioner/assessee is the appellant in this appeal, which is directed against the order dated 1.9.2003 made in W.P. No. 12598 of 2003, where the appellant/writ petitioner/assessee had chosen to challenge the order of the first respondent/Settlement Commission dated 28.10.2002, based on which notices dated 21.3.2003 under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'), were issued to the appellant/writ petitioner/ assessee, stating the reason for re-opening the assessment with respect to assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97, as contemplated under Section 147 of the Act.2.1. The facts, in nutshell, are as follows:The first respondent/Settlement Commission has passed an order dated 28.10.2002 with respect to one M/s. Mohan Aluminium (P) Ltd., Bangalore (hereinafter will be referred to as 'MAL'), for the assessment year 1995-96. Before the Settlement Commissioner, one V.Jagadisan, Chartered Accountant, who appeared on behalf of MAL...
Areva T and D India Ltd. (Formerly Known as Alstom Ltd.) Vs. Income-ta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: (2008)218CTR(Mad)128; [2008]299ITR76(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian J.1. In this appeal, the assessee questioned the correctness of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated May 15, 2007, made in I.T.A. No. 408/Mds/2004 in relation to the assessment year 2003-04.2. The appellant is a limited company having its registered office at Calcutta and head office at Chennai and is engaged in the business of manufacturing switch gears and selling electrical equipments including high voltage and medium voltage switch gears, transformers, control panels, relays, electrical equipments involved in the development of power generation, transmission and distribution. The appellant's parent company is in France. The appellant is a holding company.3. In order to facilitate easy and quick communication and to ensure internet access with its group companies throughout the world, the assessee used the services of Equant, U.K., which is in the business of providing service in the area of connectivity by world-wide network. It is the further ca...
Glory Jeeva Rita Vs. Executive Director, Bharat Petroleum Corporation ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ARBLR588(Madras)
S. Rajeswaran, J.1. OA No. 441 of 2008 has been filed to suspend the order of termination passed by the third respondent vide Ref. TCN.LPG.JOTHI dated 18.01.2008 pending proceedings of the arbitrator.OA No. 442 of 2008 has been filed to direct the respondents herein to redeliver the goods taken by them such as all records including SV/TV pads, entire stock of LPG filled/empty cylinders, DPRs/equipments taken from Jothi Gas Service, Tirunelveli and permitting the petitioner to continue the distributorship of Bharat Gas at Tirunelveli as per the distributorship agreement dated 13.07.2004 pending the proceedings of the arbitrator.2. The brief facts as culled out from the affidavit filed in support of OA Nos. 441 and 442 of 2008 are as under:The applicant applied for distributorship of LPG Bharat Gas by her application dated 03.10.2000. She was selected by the Corporation for LPG distributorship. Before attending the interview on 07.02.2004, she entered into an agreement of sale with one S...
C.R. Chenthilkumar Vs. K. Sutha
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-11-2008
Reported in: II(2008)DMC278
G. Rajasuria, J.1. Challenging the judgment and decree dated 18.1.2006, passed in A.S. No. 9 of 2005 by the learned District Judge, Kanyakumari at Nagercoil, in reversing the judgment and decree of divorce dated 2.12.2004 passed in H.M.O.P. No. 14 of 2003 by the learned Principal Sub-Judge, Nagercoil, this Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal has been filed by the husband.2. For convenience sake, the parties are referred to hereunder as husband and wife.3. Both the Courts below detailed and delineated the averments as found set out in the petition as well as in the counter and reply. Even then, I am of the view that this being a matrimonial matter, it is just and necessary to set out the facts to some extent in detail.4. Broadly but briefly, narratively but precisely the case of the husband as stood exposited from the records could be portrayed thus:(i) The petitioner/husband and the respondent/wife got married as per the hindu rites and customs on 25.6.1999 which is an arranged marriage....
Tamil Nadu Chess Association Rep. by Its Secretary, Mr. S. Veerajothi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)CTC16; (2008)3MLJ180
S. Tamilvanan, J.Both the writ appeals have been preferred by Tamil Nadu Chess Association, Theni against the common order, dated 29.10.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge. For convenience, the parties to both appeals are referred to, as arrayed in W.A. No. 3728 of 2004.2. Aggrieved by the order, dated 29.10.2003, passed in W.P. No. 32077 of 2002, the appellant herein has preferred W.A. No. 3728 of 2004. The said writ petition had been filed by the fourth respondent herein, whereby sought an order of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records of the respondents, culminated in Order No. 24391/II/2002, dated 01.07.2002 of the first respondent and quash the same and to cancel the registration made in PKM-81 of 2002, dated 29.04.2002 by the third respondent in favour of the appellant herein to have the Association registered under the similar name 'Tamil Nadu Chess Association', which the petitioner had already registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act.3. Aggriev...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »