Court : Chennai
1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/second respondent against the Award and Decree, dated 31.03.2003, made in M.C.O.P.No.511 of 2002, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub-Ordinate Court, Thiruvallur, awarding a compensation of Rs.12,17,000/- together with 9% interest per annum, from the date of filing petition till the date of payment of compensation. 2. Aggrieved by the said Award and Decree, the appellant/second respondent has filed the above appeal praying to scale down the award and decree passed by the Tribunal.3. The short facts of the case are as follows:on 17.02.2002, at about 05.30 p.m. the deceased D.Simson was standing with his friend in G.N.T.road, Athipedu bus stand, at that time the first respondent's Swaraj Mazda Mini Lorry bearing registration No.TAC7177, coming from north to south, in a rash and negligent manner by its driver dashed against the deceased and caused his death. The accident had occurred only due to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. The petitioner has filed the above writ petition for a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the impugned Order in unnumbered O.A. (Sr No.253/08) dated 10.01.2008 passed by the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore, the sixth respondent herein as wholly unsustainable in law.2. The contention of the petitioner in brief is as follows:-The petitioner was granted a loan by the respondents bank in the year 1995 to the tune of Rs.5 lakhs and he was paying the instalments regularly till 1999 and thereafter, due to his inability to pay the instalment amount, the firm was declared as NPA on 27.02.2003 by the first respondent bank. Thereafter, on 27.02.2003, the bank offered a one time settlement fixing the total outstanding as Rs.5.84 crores which the petitioner accepted, but he could not pay the amount within the time. One year thereafter, the bank again offered second OTS on 12.03.2004 and this time, the amount was fixed at Rs.5.87 lakhs. Though the petitioner agre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. Heard Mr.S.Selvathirumurugan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.C.Devi, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.2. The petitioner was appointed as single part-time vocational teacher in R.S. Government Higher Secondary School. His appointment was approved with effect from 01.12.1992 by the third respondent by an order dated 05.07.1993.3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner possessed qualification for appointment to the post of vocational teacher.4. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.834, Education, Science and Technology (HS.II) Department, dated 23.09.1994 and also issued G.O.Ms.No.358, Elementary Education Department, dated 18.08.1997 appointing the part-time vocational teachers as Secondary Grade Teachers, even if they did not possess qualification, by sending them for training.5. The Government also issued another G.O.Ms.No.680, Education, Science and Technology (VE) Department, dated 20.09.1996 approving the appointments of fully qua...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. Second defendant in OS.No.439 of 2001 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Erode is the petitioner in the above civil revision petition.2. The said suit has been filed by the respondent herein for recovery of money. On 12.4.2004, the defendants were set ex parte and they filed IA.Nos.391 and 392 of 2004 seeking to set aside the ex parte decree. On 12.8.2004, the said applications were allowed on the condition of deposit of 25% of the suit claim. However, the first defendant filed CRP.NO.2036 of 2004 before this Court and it was allowed on 28.9.2007 and the condition of depositing 25% of the suit claim came to be set aside. But, the second defendant the petitioner herein did not challenge the order dated 12.8.2004 and hence, the same has become final. Thereafter, when the said suit is taken up for hearing, the petitioner herein filed IA.No.658 of 2009 to set aside the ex parte decree. However, IA.No.658 of 2009 came to be dismissed and being aggrieved by that, the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. The petition is filed seeking a direction to call for the records in C.C.No.16 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottiyur and quash the same.2. The petitioner has been charged for offences punishable under Sec.341, 294-b, 332 and 355 IPC. This is a peculiar case of the prosecution against a woman of aged 39 years, who travelled along with her two children from Periyar Nagar Bus Stand to Chindadripet in the bus Route No.28 of the Madras Transport Corporation. The complainant is the conductor who was on duty and according to him, on 9.1.2010, around 7.10 p.m, the petitioner and her children boarded the bus he asked for the tickets; she tendered a hundred rupees note and asked for only one ticket. When the conductor asked her to take tickets for the children also, she refused and demanded only one ticket. Therefore, the conductor promptly told her to get down at the next bus stop, since she was not willing to take three tickets. However, according to the cond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. In these Writ Petitions, Petitioner(s) seek Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmapuri to consider and dispose of the applications made by the Petitioner(s) for issuance of Community Certificate for the Petitioner(s) son/daughter respectively.2. Since, the issue involved and point for consideration in all the Writ Petitions are one and the same, all the Writ Petitions were taken up together and shall stand disposed of by this Common Order.3. Case of Petitioner(s) is that they belong to "Kurichchan Community" which is a Scheduled Tribe as per G.O.Ms.No.1564 Social Welfare Development dated 30.07.1985 and that Respondent has issued certificate to their relatives stating that they belong to "Kurichchan Community" which is notified as Scheduled Tribe in the Presidential Order. Case of Petitioner(s) is that they applied to the Respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmapuri in January 2010 and since there was no response from the Respondent, Petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. All three writ petitions are filed to set aside the order of the first respondent dated 31.08.2009 in and under which he has ordered transfer of patta in respect of survey numbers in question.2. As all the three writ petitions are against the same order and are for identical relief, though based on slightly different set of facts, all the three writ petitions are being disposed of by common order.3. The brief facts relevant herein are set out as follows:(i) The petitioners in all the three writ petitions claim to be the purchasers of different extent of land in different survey numbers purchased either from the 3rd respondent or from the co-owners of the lands in question as per the registered sale deeds particulars of which are furnished in the writ petition affidavits. (ii) The 3rd respondent in all the three writ petitions Munusamy Naicker filed suit for partition in O.S.No.14 of 1991 on the file of Sub Judge, Tiruvallur against Adhilakshsmiammal and others for partition and sepa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. The petitioners have approached this Court contending that they are residents of Magalingam Nagar Village, Elavoor, Thiruvallur District. The petitioner in W.P.No.7968 of 2010 is having agricultural land to an extent of 1 acre 20 cents comprised in Survey No.336/4B at Magalingam Nagar and the petitioner in W.P.No.7969 of 2010 is having agricultural land to an extent of 1 acre 80 cents comprised in Survey No.1276/1B at Magalingam Nagar. Adjacent to their properties, there are 11 acres 87 cents comprised in Survey Numbers as follows:- S.No. Surevey No. Extent1. 1281/1M 1 Acre 12 cents2. 1281/1S 1 Acre 02 cents3. 1281/1F 0 Acre 96 cents4. 1281/1G 0 Acre 98 cents5. 1281/1C 0 Acre 97 cents6. 1281/1H 0 Acre 97 cents7. 1281/1I 0 Acre 98 cents8. 1281/1J 0 Acre 96 cents9. 1281/1D 0 Acre 98 cents10. 1281/1E 1 Acre 00 cents11. 1281/1K 0 Acre 97 cents12. 1281/1L 0 Acre 96 cents---------------------Total extent 11 Acres 87 cents---------------------According to the petitioners, the said lands ar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/second respondent against the Award and Decree, dated 05.01.2006, made in M.C.O.P.No.108 of 2005, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Additional Sub Court, Erode, awarding a compensation of Rs.93,200/- together with 7.5% interest per annum, from the date of filing petition till the date of payment of compensation. 2.Aggrieved by the said Award and Decree, the appellant/second respondent has filed the above appeal praying to scale down the award and decree passed by the Tribunal. 3.The short facts of the case are as follows:On 04.01.2004, at about 06.45 p.m. the petitioner was walking on the Erode to Arachalur road, near Avalpondurai bus stop, on the left side of the road, and at that time, the first respondent drove the second respondent Corporation bus bearing registration No.TN33 N1356 in a rash and negligent manner with an uncontrollable speed from north to south and dashed against the petition...
Tag this Judgment!