Chennai Court March 2010 Judgments

L.C. Jayakaran and Vs. Thanthai Periyar Transport Corporation Limited ...

Court: Chennai

C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellants/petitioners against the Award and Decree, dated 23.09.1998, made in M.C.O.P. No. 418 of 1988, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Tindivanam, awarding a compensation of Rs. 3,48,600/- together with interest at the rate of 15% 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 appellants/petitioners have filed the above appeal praying for an enhancement of additional compensation of Rs. 4,51,400/- together with interest from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation.3. The short facts of the case are as follows:The first petitioner is the wife and the minor second petitioner is the only child of the deceased Jayakaran. The deceased was a B.Ed., Teacher and drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 1,089/- besides this he was alone engaged in private tuition and ther...

P. Sivaprakasam Vs. R. Karthikeyan

Court: Chennai

ORDERC.T. Selvam, J.1. This petition seeks to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 1633 of 2006 on the file of the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, in so far as the petitioner is concerned. The case is one relating to the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act wherein the first accused is a proprietary concern, the second accused is the proprietor thereof and the third accused/petitioner is the father of the second accused.2. A perusal of the complaint shows that this petitioner has been roped in as one of the accused on the strength of allegations that he joined the second accused in seeking a loan from the respondent. 3. I have perused the materials available on record having regard to the submission made.4. When the borrower is admittedly a proprietary concern, none other than the proprietor i.e. the second accused can be roped in. As observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Raghu Lakshminarayanan v. Fine Tubes in (2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 455, 'a person may car...

imperial Spirits and Wine Private Limited Rep. by Its Director Vs. the ...

Court: Chennai

ORDERK. Venkataraman, J.1. The petitioner has come up with the writ petition in W.P. No. 11239 of 2009 for a mandamus directing the third respondent to provide information as sought for in its application dated 12.05.2009 under the Right to Information Act.2. Challenging the order of the second respondent dated 12.06.2009 rejecting its application and the consequential order dated 17.06.2009 returning its application for grant of privilege and licence under the Indian Made Foreign Spirit (Manufacture) Rules and consequently directing the second respondent to consider its application dated 04.05.2006 and grant licence to manufacture Indian Made Foreign Spirit, the petitioner has come up with W.P. No. 11240 of 2009.3. The case of the petitioner in both the writ petitions, in nutshell, is set out here under:(a) The petitioner is a part of the Imperial Group of Companies which was incorporated in the year 2002 under the Companies Act, 1956 and it has vast experience in the field of manufac...

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Banumathi and ors.

Court: Chennai

S. Manikumar, J.1. In an accident, which occurred on 06.03.2001, the husband of the first respondent died. Legal representatives of the deceased, wife, two minor children, parents claimed compensation of Rs. 13,00,000/-. The appellant/Insurance Company, with the leave of the Tribunal, disputed the manner of the accident, negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle, insured with them, and liability to pay compensation, under different heads.2. However, the Tribunal on evaluation of pleadings and evidence, found that the driver of the vehicle, insured with the appellant-Insurance company was responsible for the accident and quantified the compensation, at Rs. 10,19,320/-, with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. Being aggrieved by the finding, regarding negligence, quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded on the quantum, the appellant-Insurance Company has preferred this appeal.3. Assailing the correctness of the findings, regarding negligence, Mr. Krishnamoorthy, lea...

P. Giribabu Vs. Deputy Director of Enforcement

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [2010]99SCL268(Mad)

ORDERK. Venkataraman, J.1. These writ petitions have been filed for mandamus directing the respondent to permit the petitioner to be accompanied by an advocate of his choice when he appears before the respondent in pursuant of the summons issued to them under Section 37 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) and recording of statement, though the advocate will be present beyond the hearing distance, if need be.2. The averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition in W.P. No. 23110 of 2009, in nutshell is set out hereunder:(i) The petitioner is a businessman and has a jewellery shop under the name of Sri Vasavi Gold & Bullion (P.) Ltd., at N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai. He is assessed to Sales tax and Income-tax. All of a sudden, the officers of the respondent conducted a search in his shop on 23-10-2009. They did not recover any document or any other incriminating material. However, they forcibly took him to the office of the Enforcement Directorate at S...

National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Kannammal @ Kannal and ors.

Court: Chennai

C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the Third respondent/National Insurance Company Limited, against the Award and Decree dated 29.08.2005, in M.C.O.P. No. 2099 of 2001, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Dharapuram, awarding a compensation amount of Rs. 2,30,250/- 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 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Dharapuram, in M.C.O.P. No. 2099 of 2001, dated 29.08.2005, the appellant/third respondent 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:The first petitioner is the widow of the deceased, second petitioner is the minor daughter of the deceased, and the third petitioner is the minor son of the deceased. They have filed the claim petition stating that on 23.12.2000 the f...

The Managing Director Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. Dhat ...

Court: Chennai

C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/respondent against the Award and Decree, dated 01.07.2004, made in M.C.O.P. No. 249 of 2003, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Thiruvallur, awarding a compensation of Rs. 2,75,500/- together with interest at the rate of 9% 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/respondent 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:The (deceased) Chandrasekar was aged about 45 years and was employed as a Watchman at Arkmind Holding Private Ltd., Ambattur, Chennai-58 and earning a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month at the time of accident. On 07.01.2003, at about 7.40 a.m. when the deceased Chandrasekar tried to board in the respondent's bus bearing registration No.TN02 N0182, when it was stopped at ...

S. Saravanan Vs. the Commandant T.N. Special Police Vi Battalion,

Court: Chennai

ORDERR. Subbiah, J.1. This writ petition is filed to call for the records of the first respondent in connection with the impugned order passed by him in PR. No. 8/2007 dated 28.08.2007 and confirmed by the 2nd and 3rd respondents in C. No. A2/AP1.17/2007 dated 07.12.2007 and RC No. 241200/AP.3(1) /2007 dated 15.05.2008 respectively and quash the same and direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service and grant him all consequential service and monetary benefits.2. The petitioner entered the service as a directly recruited Police Constable through a selection conducted by Uniformed Service Recruitment Board and appointed to service on 12.12.2003. After institutional training, the petitioner was directed to serve in the Tamil Nadu Special Police VI Battalion, E. Company, Madurai. The petitioner entered medical leave due to ill health from 04.12.2006 to 18.12.2006 and due to non-recovery from the illness, the petitioner needed further treatment and hence he extended his l...

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. N. Thavasi,

Court: Chennai

D. Hariparanthaman, J.1. The appellant is the Insurance Company. The first respondent travelled in the lorry owned by the third respondent as a Load man. The second respondent was the driver of the lorry. The lorry was insured with the appellant herein. The lorry capsized and the first respondent received grievous injuries and suffered 90% permanent partial disability. He filed M.C.O.P. No. 121 of 2000 claiming, Rs. 7 lakhs as compensation.2. The Tribunal passed an award, dated 05.06.2002, granting Rs. 7 lakhs as compensation, though the Tribunal found that the first respondent is entitled to Rs. 9,98,067/- as compensation. The Tribunal restricted the award to Rs. 7 lakhs, since, the claimant claimed only Rs. 7 lakhs as compensation. The Tribunal awarded the amount as claimed by the claimant. This appeal is by the Insurance Company against the said order.3. Heard the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on either side.4. The learned Counsel for the first respondent raises ...

The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. ...

Court: Chennai

C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/respondent, against the Award and Decree, dated 21.09.2005, made in M.C.O.P. No. 28 of 2002, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Attur, awarding a compensation amount of Rs. 2,96,000/- 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 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Attur, the appellant/The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Salem-7 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 28.10.2001, at about 10.30 p.m. when the deceased Murugesan was riding his motorcycle on the Salem to Attur main road, on the extreme left side of the road and when the said vehicle was proceeding near Kothambadi pirivu road, a bus bearing registration No. TN27...