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.
A. Thangapandi Vs. M. Sivabalan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ155
Elipe Dharma Rao, J.1. The appellant herein was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the 6th respondent School on 1.6.1994. The 6th respondent School is functioning as a Non-minority aided Educational institution, getting grants from the State under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Grant-in-aid code of the Educational Department and the School is covered by the rules and regulations of Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act. 1973 and the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 1974.2. It is seen from the records that one V. Chokkalai was working as Physical Director Grade-II and he retired on attaining the age of superannuation on the A.N. of 30.9.1999 but was re-employed from 1.10.1999to 31.5.2000. In the meanwhile, pursuant to the repeated requests of the said V. Chokkalai and as per G.O.(4D) No. 1, School Education Department dated 21.1.2000, the Director of School Education had passed orders in his proceedings R.C. No. 2431/W7/W12/97, dated 21...
P. Appasamy Vs. Samy Lourde Joseph and Oumadevi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ367
C. Nagappan, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree, dated 23.8.1995 made in O.S. No. 221 of 1994 on the file of I Additional Subordinate Judge, Pondicherry. The second defendant is the appellant.2. The first respondent herein filed the suit seeking for a judgment and decree directing the defendants to pay a sum of Rs. 1,83,400/- to the plaintiff with subsequent interest at the rate of 12% per annum and for costs of the suit.The case of the plaintiff is that the second defendant, as a power of attorney of first defendant, has entered into a sale agreement with the plaintiff on 6.6.1992 to sell the suit property for a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- and on the date of the sale agreement, the second defendant received advance amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- and further agreed to complete the sale within three months, failing which, he agreed to repay the advance amount in double and the plaintiff has to lose the advance amount if the default is on his part. It is further stated by ...
Ranganathan Vs. the Co-operative Sub-registrar/Sale Officer Nellikuppa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ137
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. Heard the arguments of Mr. V. Raghavachari, counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Muralidharan, learned Counsel for the second respondent and perused the records.2. In this writ petition, the petitioner (as per the prayer amended on 06.11.2007) seeks to challenge the Execution Proceedings in CEP No. 151 of 1984-85 dated 26.8.1997 on the file of the third respondent (who was impleaded on 06.11.2007)3. The petitioner was a driver in the Nellikuppam Municipality and at the time of filing the writ petition, it is stated that he was 52 years old and by now, he would have got retired from service. At the time when he was in the service of the Municipality, he became a member of the Nellikuppam Co-operative House Building Society and he availed loan of a sum of Rs. 12,000/- with 10.75% interest. He also executed a registered Deed of Mortgage dated 24.6.1974. Subsequently, as he did not pay the instalment of the loan repayment properly, the second respondent initiated arb...
B. Narayanaswamy Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Secretary to Gove ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)4MLJ596
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. Heard the arguments of Mr. Karthick Rajan, counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pa. Kadirvel, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the respondents and perused the records.2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order of the Government in G.O. Ms. No. 16 Higher Education Department dated 01.02.2007. Though the order passed by the first respondent Government is in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner is only aggrieved about the relaxation that has been granted by the Government Order was only with effect from 02.3.2006 in terms of the power exercised under Rule 48 of the General Rules of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said exemption ought to have been granted from the date the petitioner was qualified to have been appointed as the Lecturer under the Tamil Nadu Collegiate Education Services and not from a prospective date.3. It is seen from the records that the petitio...
P.V. Arumugam Vs. Gurusamy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Reported in: IV(2008)BC237
ORDERA.C. Arumugaperumal Adityan, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order passed in Transfer O.P. No. 84 of 2007 on the file of the First Additional District Court, Erode. The said petition was filed under Section 24 of C.P.C. for transferring O.S. No. 21 of 2006 pending on the file of Subordinate Judge, Bhavani to the Court of First Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode to be tried along with O.S. No. 214 of 2007. The learned First Additional District Judge, Erode, had dismissed the petition on the ground that the evidence in O.S. No. 21 of 2006 will be voluminous on the other hand, the evidence to be recorded in O.S. No. 214 of 2007 will be limited.2. Admittedly, in O.S. No. 21 of 2006 and in O.S. No. 214 of 2007 both-the plaintiff and the first defendant are one and the same. The second defendant in O.S. No. 21 of 2006 viz., Mariammal, is the mother of the first defendant Gurusamy and Marimuthu, the third defendant is the vendee under the first defendant Gurusamy. O.S. ...
S. Saraswathi and ors. Vs. the State Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ200
ORDERP. Jyothimani, J.1. The petitioners in this writ petition have challenged the notification issued by the first respondent, Government in G.O.Ms. No. 73 dated 19.02.1997, published in the Government gazette dated 19.03.1997 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 in respect of the lands to an extent of 3 acres situate in Survey No. 485/1 in Kasipalayam Panchayat, Erode Village and Taluk.2. The petitioners 1 to 4 have purchased the said 3 acres out of 3.55 acres on 25.02.1986 and after that they obtained necessary approval on 21.01.1988 and formed a lay-out consisting of 43 plots and a shop and the petitioners 5 to 9 have purchased various house sites under the approved lay-out from petitioners 1 to 4 on 27.09.1995. According to the petitioners, originally, the total extent of land (3.55 acres) comprised in Survey No. 485/1 belonged to the family of one N. Kandasamy Gounder and his wife Valliammal and their two sons, viz., K. Palanisamy and M.K. Ramasamy and the revenue ...
Commissioner of Customs (Exports) Vs. Choice International
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: 2008(128)ECC31; 2008(154)LC31(Madras); 2008(228)ELT190(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. This appeal is filed by the Department against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai made in Final Order No. 789/2007 dated 27.6.2007 along with Stay Order No. 645/2007.2. The appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal came to be filed against the demand of anti-dumping duty on Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL, for short) imported by the respondent herein and cleared under flour Bills of Entry during November-December 2002. The CFLs are of Chinese origin and are governed by two notifications viz., Notification No. 128/2001 dated 21.12.2001 (Provisional) and Notification No. 138/2002 dated 10.12.2002 (final). The goods imported by the respondent were provisionally cleared under Section 18(1) of the Act against the bonds executed by the importer for a period of six months. The bonds were not renewed nor were any such renewal requisitioned by the Department. Further, no show cause notice was issued by...
Dr. N. Iyyanar Vs. the Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welf ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: (2008)3MLJ415
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels appearing for the parties.2. The petitioner along with another person had filed Original Application No. 1404 of 2001 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal for issuing a direction to the State Government to promote such applicants to the post of Deputy Director Health Services. It was stated in the Original Application that even though the respondents 3 to 6 in the O.A., (Respondents 3 to 6 in the present writ petition) were appointed as Health Officers during the year 1993 and the applicants were appointed as Health Officers in the year 1994, the respondents had not passed the diploma in Public Health Course within the stipulated period of four years and, therefore such persons could not have been considered for promotion by ignoring the case of the applicants.3. In the notification issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission for filling up the post of Public Health Officer. It was indicated as follows:4. Qualification: C...
Mrs. S. Clara Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2477
ORDERM. Jeyapaul, J.1. The petition is filed seeking a direction to the second respondent-Central Bureau of Investigation to register a case and investigate the matter. The petitioner is the mother of the victim who was allegedly murdered in Kuwait. It has been alleged in the complaint that the victim Hemalatha, daughter of the petitioner, was hale and healthy. She has virtually no health problem at the time of her death. The husband of the said Hemalatha and one Thomas launched a murderous attack on her on 11-5-2004 at 11.00 p.m. when she resisted the sexual assault perpetrated on her by the said Thomas. The victim who could not brook the sexual assault was pushed down to the ground by those two persons and as a result of which the victim sustained injury which resulted in her unconsciousness and thereafter her death after 17 days. It is also alleged that the accused prevented the petitioner from conducting post-mortem examination to ascertain the cause of death and they simply buried...
icici Bank Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Reported in: [2009]89SCL147(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. This Appeal is filed against the order dated 31-8-2005 made in Company Application No. 134 of 2005 in Company Petition No. 263 of 2001. The Company M/s. Secals Limited has been ordered to be wound up as per the orders of this Court dated 1 -8-2002 in C.P. No. 263 of 2001 on the basis of the recommendations made in BIFR No. 332 of 2000. By the said order, the Company Court directed the Official Liquidator to take charge of the assets of the Company. Further, the Directors of the Company were directed to file statement of affairs within three weeks from the date of the order of liquidation of the Company. This Court, in O.S.As. Nos. 244 and 245 of 2003 by order dated 17-12-2003 permitted the appellant herein to sell the assets of the company in liquidation and deposit the sale proceeds to the credit of the Company Petition after defraying the expenses. Pursuant to the same, a sum of Rs. 5,20,29,899 has been transferred to the Official Liquidator by the appellant...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »