Chennai Court March 2010 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.
The Madurai District Central Co-operative Bank Limited Vs. the Joint C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. Both the writ petitions were filed by the petitioner Management.2. In the first writ petition, challenge was to the order passed by the first respondent Appellate authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short P.G. Act) dated 29.12.2009 made in PG. Appeal No. 45/99 affirming the order of the second respondent dated 18.12.1999 in P.G.36/98.3. The writ petition was admitted on 11.04.2000. pending the writ petition, this Court granted an order of interim stay. Subsequently, when a vacate stay application being filed and when the matter came up on 20.09.2000, this Court recorded that the petitioner had already deposited the disputed amount namely Rs. 36,290.50 with the respondent. It was directed that the amount should be invested by the respondent in some approved security and the third respondent will be entitled to withdraw the interest once in six months.4. Thereafter, the same bank filed another writ petition being W.P. No. 39594 of 2002, challengin...
Kanniappan and ors. Vs. State Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
M. Chockalingam, J.1. Challenge is made to the judgment dated 8.1.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Court-cum-Fast Track Court, Dharmapuri in S.C. No.145 of 3007, whereby the accused/appellants, seven in numbers, stood charged, tried and awarded punishment as follows:Sl. No. Rank of the Charges Sentenceaccused1 1st accused 147, 148, 324 One year R.I. and to pay a fine ofread with 149, Rs. 500/- in default to undergo R.I.307 read with for one month for the offence under149 and 302 Section 148 I.P.C.I.P.C.R.I. for two years and to pay a fineof Rs. 500/- in default to undergo R.I.for two months for the offence underSection 324 read with 149 I.P.C.R.I. for five years and to pay a fineof Rs. 500/- in default to undergo R.I.for six months for the offence underSection 307 I.P.C.Life imprisonment and to pay a fine ofRs.2,000/- in default to undergo R.I.For two years for the offence underSection 302 read with 149 I.P.C.2 2nd accused 147, 148, 324 One year R.I. and to pay a fine ofread with...
Nallammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Secretary to Gove ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
ORDERM. Chockalingam, J.1. Challenge is made to an order of the second respondent made in C.M.P. No. 33/09 dated 14.8.2009, ordering the petitioner's son Vilvathurai to be detained under Act 14 of 1982 branding him as a Goonda.2. The Court heard the learned Counsel on either side and looked into all the materials available.3. It is not in controversy that on the recommendation made by the Sponsoring Authority that he is involved in two cases namely (1) Avaniyapuram PS Crime No. 538/2007 under Sections 147, 148, 341, 307 and 302 IPC and (2) Avaniyapuram PS Crime No. 324/2009 under Section 392 read with 397 IPC, and also one ground case in Avaniyapuram PS Crime No. 328/2009 under Section 392 of IPC for an occurrence on 28.6.2009, and he was also arrested on 30.6.2009, the detaining authority on scrutiny of the materials, recorded its subjective satisfaction that the activities of the detenu were prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order and has made the order under challenge aft...
R. Devi Vs. Tmt. S. Lakshmi, Superintendent of Police, Central Range, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. The petitioner is an Assistant working in the office of the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department. She has come forward to file the present Writ Petition seeking to challenge the order passed by the Superintendent of Police, Central Range, Vigilance and Anti Corruption (for short 'DVAC'), Chennai dated 23.3.2010 in placing her under suspension in terms of Rule 17(e)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Though the Superintendent of Police who passed the order has been made as a party in her individual name but the office which held by her is not shown as a party to the Writ Petition.2. In the order of suspension, which is impugned in this Writ Petition, it was stated that when the petitioner was working as an Assistant in the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption, she contacted Commercial Tax Check-post officials at Pethikuppam in order to influence them to release a Lorry bearing Regn. No. MP-07 G4828 loaded with ceramic goo...
V. Venu and Vs. the Tahsildar,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
ORDERV. Dhanapalan, J.1. By consent of the learned Counsel on either side, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal.2. The prayer in the writ petitions is to forbear the respondents from dispossessing the petitioners from the lands situated in S. Nos. 50/1, 50/5 and 51/1 of Achalvadi Village, Harur Taluk.3. The petitioner in W.P.No.15297 of 2005 and the petitioner in W.P. No. 15298 of 2005 claim that they are the patta owners of lands situated in S. Nos. 51/2 and 50/2A and in S. No. 50/2B, respectively, in Achalvadi Village. According to them, adjoining these patta lands, there are Government poramboke lands in S. Nos. 50/1, 50/5 and 51/1 in Achalvadi village of an extent of 40 cents and those lands are in possession and enjoyment of the families of the petitioners for quite some time and they have cultivated some crops in it. As there was demand of tax by means of 'B' Memo, the petitioners claim that their possession is recognised. According to the petitioners, some person...
The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Thirumoorthy (Death) and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/second respondent against the Award and Decree, dated 26.04.2007, made in M.C.O.P. No. 133 of 2006, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Fast Track Court No. III, Vridhachalam, awarding a compensation of Rs. 3,80,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of payment of compensation.2. Aggrieved by the said Award and Decree, the appellant/second respondent, The National Insurance Co., Ltd., Chennai, has filed the above appeal praying to set aside the award and decree passed by the Tribunal.3. The short facts of the case are as follows:On 28.02.2005, at 10.00 a.m. when the (deceased) Muthuvel was proceeding on his cycle carefully from east to west on the Kozhiyur bridge at the Thittakudi-Vriddhachalam main road, near Kozhiyur bus stop, the first respondent's lorry bearing registration No. TN46 C5...
The Superintending Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs. M. Palani ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. The Superintending Engineer, Salem Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Salem is the writ petitioner. The present writ petition has been filed against the order passed by the third respondent/Appellate Authority under the Tamil Nadu Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act (for brevity, 'Tamil Nadu Act 43 of 1981'). By the order passed by the third respondent/Appellate Authority, he has reversed the order passed by the second respondent/Authority constituted under the Tamil Nadu Act 43 of 1981.2. The first respondent claimed subsistence allowance before the second respondent for the period from November, 1995 to September, 1997. He was finally dismissed from service on 1.10.1997. The second respondent took up the case as P.S.A.56 of 1998. The Authority held that the subsistence allowance application is not maintainable and the first respondent cannot claim subsistence allowance on the basis of the revision of the wages that took place subsequ...
G. Sukumar Vs. the Competent Authority Under Minimum Wages Act Cum Dep ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. The petitioner is carrying on photostat copy business by name 'Deepika Xerox' at Cuddalore. He employed the third respondent as a part-time employee in the said shop. On an inspection, the Assistant Inspector of Labour, Cuddalore filed an application before the first respondent under Section 20 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (for brevity, 'the Act'). The Authority held that the petitioner has not been paying minimum wages to the third respondent and is liable to pay the difference of minimum wages of a sum of Rs. 5,702.70 and since the minimum wages are not paid in time, he also imposed two times penalty of Rs. 11,405.40. The petitioner was directed to pay the said amount by the authority vide order dated 1.6.2001. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.2. The writ petition was admitted on 11.10.2001. Pending the writ petition, interim stay was granted which was subsequently made absolute on 15.9.2003. Though the third respondent has be...
Alagu Sakthivel Vs. State by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
M. Chockalingam, J.1. Challenge is made to a judgment of the Additional Sessions Division, Coimbatore, made in S.C. No. 113 of 2008 whereby the sole accused/appellant stood charged under Sections 341 and 302 of IPC, tried, found guilty of murder and awarded punishment of life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 2000/- and default sentence while he was acquitted of the charge under Section 341 of IPC.2. Short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows:(a) P.W.1 is the daughter of the deceased Muthulakshmi. P.W.2 is her husband. She was living with her husband at a place called Karathozhuvam at Udumalpet. P.W.1's mother got separated from her husband 15 years back, and she was living separately. She developed intimacy with the deceased. While it was continuing, one Subramani who used to lend money to the deceased, came to her house often. The accused suspected her conduct and fidelity.(b) On 27.12.2007, P.W.1 accompanied by her husband P.W.2, went to the h...
Dr. K. Ponsingh Vs. Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Depart ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-31-2010
Prabha Sridevan, J.1. The Assistant Secretary, the appellant herein, who was working as in-charge of Indian Medical Practitioners Cooperative Pharmacy and Stores Limited (for short IMPCOPS), was placed under suspension. A domestic enquiry was initiated. According to the appellant, the subsistence allowance was not paid to him. Therefore, he filed three writ petitions viz., (1) W.P. No. 21659 of 2008 for payment of subsistence allowance (W.A. 190/2010), (2) W.P. No. 6521 of 2009 for quashing the order passed by the second respondent to hold domestic enquiry (W.A. 189/2010) and (3) W.P. No. 26794 of 2008 for a direction to quash the suspension order (WA.191/2010).2. Learned single Judge dismissed all the writ petitions. While doing so, a direction was given for payment of subsistence allowance to the petitioner in terms of the bye-laws of the respondent-society. Now, these three writ appeals have been filed.3. The appellant was picked up by the police for an enquiry at around 6.00 a.m. o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »