Chennai Court April 2010 Judgments
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Thamizharasi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/respondent against the Award and Decree, dated 24.03.2005, made in M.C.O.P. No. 76 of 2000, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Panruti, awarding a compensation amount of Rs. 3,51,000/- 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 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the appellant/respondent has filed the above appeal praying to scale down the award passed by the Tribunal.3. The short facts of the case are as follows:The petitioners submitted that the first petitioner is the widow of the deceased, second and third petitioners are the son and daughter of the deceased and the fourth petitioner is the mother of the deceased. On 24.02.2000, the deceased and others had gone to Tindivanam Town Crusher for loading blue metal in the first respondent's lorry bearing registratio...
Tag this Judgment!Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., by Its Chairman and Vs. Saroja,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
R. Banumathi, J.1. Being aggrieved by the award of compensation of Rs. 14,15,280/- for the death of Chandrakasan in the road traffic accident on 20.06.2001, the insured - Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited and the insurer - Oriental Insurance Company have filed this appeal.2. The deceased Chandrakasan was working as Operator Grade II B in Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited. The brief facts are that on 20.06.2001 at about 8.45 hours, when the deceased Chandrakasan was travelling as a pillion rider on the TVS 50 bearing Registration No. TN 31 T 4140 along with one Raju from Mantharakuppam to Neyveli Township, near Thandavankuppam, the Fire Service Lorry belonging to the first appellant bearing Registration No. TCF 2106 driven in a rash and negligent manner came behind and hit against the TVS 50. In the accident, the deceased sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident, he was admitted in N.L.C. Hospital, Neyveli and thereafter, he was referred to Apollo Hospital, Chenna...
Tag this Judgment!M. Panaiyadian Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its Secretary to Go ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
ORDERT.S. Sivagnanam, J.1. By consent the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. The prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the order passed by the second respondent dated 10.01.2006, and consequently direct the respondents to pay the petitioner's gratuity amount without any recovery on the salary paid to the petitioner.2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is as follows:The petitioner was functioning as the District Registrar (Audit) and attained the age of superannuation on 31.12.2005. Pursuant to Government order No. 1455, while in service as Sub-Registrar Grade-I, the petitioner's pay was refixed with effect from 01.01.1996, based on the recommendations of the fifth pay commission and the District Registrar by order dated 20.04.1998, revised the petitioner's scale of pay from 20.04.1998, from Rs. 6493/- to Rs. 7237/- along with allowances. Thereafter, pursuant to orders dated 29.02.1996, 01.01.1997 and ...
Tag this Judgment!S. Saravanamuthu Vs. V. Moorthy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
P.R. Shivakumar , J.1. The plaintiff in the original suit O.S. No. 5851 of 2004 on the file of the learned XI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai is the appellant in the second appeal. The suit was filed by the appellant herein/plaintiff against the respondents herein for a permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with the administration and management of the technical institution of the said Trust, namely Thirutani Arulmiku Murugen Educational Trust. Though the suit was filed against totally five persons, the suit, as against the fifth respondent (Kamalakar), had been dismissed for non-prosecution and the suit, as against the other respondents, namely respondents 1 to 4 alone was proceeded with. Out of the above said four persons, namely respondents 1 to 4, except the first respondent/first defendant, the other three respondents, did not contest the suit and remained ex-parte before the trial court. The first respondent/first defendant alone filed a written statem...
Tag this Judgment!S. Parthiban Rep. by Mother and Next Friend S. Susila Vs. Western Agen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant, against the award and decree passed in M.C.O.P. No. 1289 of 1999, dated 11.03.2003, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District & Sessions Court, (Fast Track Court No. II), on transfer from Small Causes Court No. IV, Chennai, for awarding a compensation a sum of Rs. 34,600/- together with the interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation.2. Having not been satisfied with the award and decree dated 11.03.2003, in M.C.O.P. No. 1289 of 1999, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court No. IV, Chennai, the appellant/claimant preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation.3. The short facts of the case are as follows:On 03.12.1998, at about 8.30 p.m. the petitioner was walking with his mother at the left end of Annai Sivagami Nagar, when the tipper lorry bearing Registration No....
Tag this Judgment!Dagger Die Cutting Rep. by Its Sole Proprietrix Mrs. Rukhsana Deshpand ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
ORDERM. Jeyapaul, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Dagger Die Cutting was started in the year 1993. It is engaged in manufacturing and selling of Leather Die Cutting Knives. The petitioner is registered as a small scale industry. It enjoys exemption in payment of excise duty. Excise duty payable on the total value of clearance was exempted to an extent of Rs. 30,00,000/- for the period 1995-2000 and to the extent of Rs. 50,00,000/- from 2000 onwards. The petitioner is also entitled to duty credit via modvat and cum-duty benefits. Her husband Mr. Nilanjan Deshpande has started Dagger International a Concern involved in retailing the Die Cutting Knives. The first respondent Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai II Commissionerate issued show cause notice dated 19.5.2000 claiming duty for the period from 1995-96 to 2000-2001. The duty has been claimed for the transactions that took place during the years 1995-96. The petitioner countered the claim of excise duty in the show cause notice issued ...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. M. Mansoor,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
M. Venugopal, J.1. The Appellant/Second Respondent/Insurance Company has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal as against the Award dated 28.04.2004 in M.C.O.P. No. 4973 of 2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal viz., II Small Causes Court, Chennai.2. On an appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Claims Tribunal in the original Claim Petition had passed an Award on 28.04.2004 awarding a total compensation of Rs. 24,65,668/- together with interest at 9% per annum from 07.08.2000 to 28.04.2004 with costs to the Respondents/Claimants 1 and 2 and directed the Appellant/Insurance Company to deposit the same within two months from the date of passing of the order.3. Dissatisfied with the Award passed by the Tribunal, the Appellant/Insurance Company (Second Respondent) has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal before this Court.4. Before the Tribunal, a common Award was passed in M.C.O.P. Nos. 4973/2001, 4561/2000 and 4554/2000. However, in th...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Director Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. T. G ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/respondent, The Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd., Chennai, against the Award and Decree, dated 28.10.2005, made in M.C.O.P. No. 4120 of 2002, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court No. VI, Chennai, awarding a compensation amount of Rs. 54,500/- 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, the appellant/respondent, The Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd., Chennai has filed the above appeal praying to scale down the compensation amount granted by the Tribunal.3. The short facts of the case are as follows:On 10.06.2002 at about 14.30 hours, while the petitioner was carefully riding his tricycle along the T.H. Road, near Tondiarpet Police Station, from north to south direction, at ...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. N.K. Mohamed Ali
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
ORDERC.T. Selvam, J.1. As the petitioner and respondent are common in all these petitions and the same question is raised for consideration in all of them, they can be disposed of by a common order.2. The petitioner herein, an Assistant Commissioner in the Income Tax Department has preferred three complaints alleging commission of offences by the respondent herein in respect of three different periods. These complaints were made on the assertion that the respondent had filed false returns of income. The facts leading to the filing of the complaints do not in any manner weigh upon the issue arising for consideration and hence, are not informed herein.3. The complaints of the petitioner in EOCC Nos. 62,63,64 of 1992 are as follows:a wilful attempt to evade Income-tax under Section 276C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961;b filing of false return of income with false statement of accounts under Section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961;c fabricating false evidence under Section 193 IPC;d using s...
Tag this Judgment!The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs. Avanashi Goun ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
R. Banumathi, J.1. These Writ Appeals arise out of the order dated 11.3.2002 made in W.P. No. 20929 of 2000 quashing the proceedings of the District Collector, Erode dated 28.11.2000 made in Ref. No. 64859/2000/K-4, whereby the District Collector, Erode, permitting Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (in short, 'TNEB') for stringing lines at location 18 and 19 in R.S. No. 893/2 of Suriampalaym Kanjikoil village. Learned single Judge also directed removal of all poles erected in S.F. No. 893/2 of Kanjikoil village, Erode District. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their array in Appeal preferred by the TNEB.2. The brief facts are that the TNEB established a 110 K.V. Sub Station at Gandhinagar near Suriampalayam village in Perundurai Taluk, Erode District. For the said Sub Station, a 110 K.V. D.C. line is stapped off from existing GobiErode 110 K.V. D.C. line located in between 326 to 327 (near Chinniyampalayam) is to be laid to connect the Sub Station to the exist...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »