Chennai Court August 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.
Astor Technologies Rep. by Its Partner, Vasudevan, Vs. L.B. Thiagaraja ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: LC2009(1)304
M. Venugopal, J.1. This Appeal is filed by the appellants/defendants as against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in Original Application No. 814 of 2002 in C.S. No. 610 of 2002 dated 24.09.2003 in dismissing the temporary injunction application restraining the respondent/plaintiff from infringing their copyright.2.The appellants/defendants/applicants filed Original Application No. 814 of 2002 praying for the relief of an interim injunction restraining the respondent/plaintiff or anyone claiming under him from in any manner infringing the copyright in the Computer Aided Design Software 'astor Eazy Design' and its variations and from dealing with the same, etc.3. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the original application O.A. No. 814 of 2002 praying for interim injunction filed by the appellants/defendants against the respondent/plaintiff inter alia stating that 'though the appellants/defendants have proved to be the owners of CAD/Astor Eazy Design and its modules etc.,...
K. Murugesh Vs. Registrar, State Human Rights Commission and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Mad1
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Despite notice, nobody appears for the private respondent.2. This writ petition has been filed by one Sub-Inspector of Police attached to D-5, Manavalan Nagar Police Station, Tiruvallur District. An enquiry against him is going on before the State Human Rights Commission. The nature of the complaint against the writ petitioner is that acting on a complaint relating to some property disputes, the writ petitioner arrested one Sankar, the third respondent herein, and allegedly handcuffed him and dragged him to the police station through a market place. Receiving such treatment from the police, the said Sankar lodged a complaint with the State Human Rights Commission and the enquiry is on. The writ petition has been filed alleging unfairness in the said enquiry. In elaborating his case on unfairness, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to page 20 of the additional typed set of papers fi...
G. Parimelazhagan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Mad54
ORDERK.K. Sasidharan, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by a male Staff Nurse of Government Medical College Hospital, Kilpauk, Chennai praying for a writ of declaration to declare Clause 4(vii) of the prospectus issued by the second respondent for the degree of Bachelor of Science in Nursing for the academic year 2007-2008 as illegal and ultra vires of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India and inconsistent with the provisions of the Indian Nursing Council Act, 1947.2. The factual matrix necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are as under:(a) The petitioner is a male nurse qualified with Diploma in General Nursing and Psychiatry and is working as a staff nurse in Government Medical College Hospital, Kilpauk, Chennai, since 2005. He is qualified for admission to degree course of Bachelor of Science in Nursing offered as per the prospectus issued for the year 2007-2008 by the second respondent. However he is aggrieved by the rule of reservation in favour of wom...
Ambattur Clothing Co. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-11-2008
Reported in: (2009)221CTR(Mad)196
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The assessee is on appeal, aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal dt. 22nd Feb., 2008 made in ITA No. 1298/Mad/2007.2. The facts culled out from the statement of facts, are as follows:The appellant/assessee is the manufacturer and seller of garments. The assessee filed return of income for the asst. yr. 2004-05 on 30th Oct., 2004 admitting total income of Rs. 16,72,21,3030 (sic). The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 24th Sept., 2005. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 7th Oct., 2005. The assessment under Section 143(3) was completed on 31st Oct., 2006 determining the total income at Rs. 17,62,36,100. While completing the assessment, the AO, inter alia, rejected the claim of deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act by excluding 90 per cent of the gross interest and commission from the profits of the business. The assessee claimed long-term capital loss in a sum of Rs. 52,38,048. The...
In Re: Vijran Hotels and Estates P. Ltd.;
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2008
Reported in: [2008]146CompCas386(Mad)
Chitra Venkataraman, J.1. These company petitions are preferred under Sections 391 - 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, for sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation of the transferor company with the transferee company with effect from April 1, 2007. The scheme of amalgamation is annexed as annexure 3 in the petition.2. The petitioner in C. P. No. 117 of 2008 is the transferor company and the petitioner in C. P. No. 118 of 2008 is the transferee company.3. A perusal of the records show that the petitioners have complied with the prescribed procedure. The certificate from the chartered accountant certifying that there are no secured creditors as far as the transferor company is concerned, petitioner in C. P. No. 117 of 2008, is enclosed as annexure 5. The transferee company, petitioner in C. P. No. 118 of 2008, has obtained consent letters from their secured creditors, which are annexed as annexures Nos. 6 and 7. The copy of the resolution dated February 1, 2008, of the board of directors ad...
United Indian Insurance Company Limited, Rural Branch Vs. M. Periyasam ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: 2010ACJ300; (2009)2MLJ469
A. Selvam, J.1. This civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred against the order passed in W.C. No. 346 of 2000 by the Court of Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Madurai.2. The first respondent herein as applicant has filed the application and the same has been taken on file in W.C. No. 346 of 2000 on the file of the Court of Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Madurai, wherein the present appellant has been shown as second opposite party and the second respondent herein has been shown as first opposite party.3. It is stated in the petition that the accident has taken place near Nakkalapatti Chamber, Madurai District on 13.09.2000 at about 11.00 a.m. The applicant has been working under the opposite party No. I as a driver of the TATA Sumo Car bearing Registration No. TN-57-B-4077 and he has driven the same from Thottappanaikanoor to Usilampatti. The said vehicle has been insured with the opposite party No. II. The applicant has driven TATA Sumo Car with due care and cautio...
S. Ponniah Vs. Secretary to Government, Revenue Department and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR846]
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. Prayer in the Writ Petition is to quash the order of the 4th respondent dated 18.2.2004, confirmed by the second respondent by order dated 28.7.2004, further confirmed by the first respondent in G.O.(2-D) No. 504, Revenue Department, dated 23.8.2007 and consequently direct the third respondent to promote the petitioner as Deputy Tahsildar.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Junior Assistant on 31.8.1989 and posted at Taluk Office, Palayamkottai. Petitioner was subsequently promoted as Assistant in the year 1994 and he was transferred to Radhapuram Taluk Office in-the year 2003. Petitioner applied for leave after joining at Radhapuram. However, the 4th respondent framed charges under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, on 1.12.2003. The crux of the charge was that the petitioner unauthorisedly absented from 1.9.2003 to 13.9.2003, 15.10.2003 to 17.10.2003 and 11.11.2003 to 26.11.2003 i.e., totally fo...
Sakthi Footwear Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: (2008)219CTR(Mad)612; [2009]317ITR199(Mad); [2009]177TAXMAN71(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. These appeals are at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Tribunal, Madras 'C Bench, dt. 18th Jan., 2008 passed in ITA Nos. 990 and 991/Mad/2007 respectively.2. The relevant assessment years are 2002-03 and 2003-04. The facts in both the appeals are one and the same in respect of both the assessment years, except the figures. Therefore, the facts as culled from one of the memorandums of appeal i.e., Tax Case No. 1066 of 2008 are stated as follows:The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture and export of shoe uppers. For the asst. yr. 2002-03, the assessee filed its return of income on 30th Sept., 2002 admitting an income of Rs. 2,40,000. Subsequently, the appellant filed a revised return on 15th Nov., 2002 declaring the same income. The return was processed under Section 143(1) and refund of Rs. 4,83,971 was issued on 25th June, 2004. Subsequently notice under Section 148 was issued and assessment under Section 143(3) r/w Section 14...
B. Rajagopal and anr. and P.C. Varghese Vs. Official Liquidator, High ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: [2008]145CompCas305(Mad); (2008)7MLJ515
M. Chockalingam, J.1. These appeals have arisen from the common order of the learned single judge of this court made in C.A. No. 888 of 1995 and C.A. No. 1321 of 2001 in C.P. No. 88 of 1989 Official Liquidator v. T. Sudarsan . While the former filed by the official liquidator was allowed granting all the reliefs, the latter at the instance of respondents Nos. 8 and 10 in C.A. No. 888 of 1995 was dismissed.2. The parties hereinafter will be referred to as official liquidator and the respondents as shown in C.A. No. 888 of 1995.3. The brief facts of the case in Company Application No. 888 of 1995 are thus:(a) M/s. Dhanalakshmi Funds (India) Ltd. was ordered to be wound up by an order of this court, dated November 16, 1990, in C.P. No. 88 of 1989 and the official liquidator became the liquidator of the said company. The company in liquidation was incorporated on August 9, 1985, and it was declared as 'Nidhi' on August 22, 1986, under the Companies Act, 1956. The main object of the company...
Computer Graphics Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Reported in: [2009]308ITR96(Mad)
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. These are the appeals at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench, dated April 30, 2008, passed in ITA Nos. 288/Mds of 2006, 1052/Mds of 2007 and 2314/Mds of 2006 by formulating the following common question of law:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the appellant was not entitled to deduction under Section 80-IB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the ground that conversion of jumbo rolls into salable packets/rolls of standard size was not manufacture or production of article or thing ?2. The relevant assessment years are 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05. The facts, as culled out from the statement of facts, are as follows:3. The assessee is a company in which the public are not substantially interested. It is engaged in the business of conversion of jumbo rolls of Konica colour paper, Konika graphic art film and medi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »