Chennai Court June 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.
K.S.Krishna ... Vs. Haj Mohamed ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. O.S.No.23 of 2009 by the Sub Court, Thiruvarur, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. Despite printing the name of the respondent, no one appeared and there is no representation on behalf of the respondent.3. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner.4. A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this civil revision petition, would run thus:- (i) The respondent herein filed the suit O.S.No.23 of 2008 based on mortgage and ultimately obtained an ex-parte preliminary decree on 28.11.2008. Subsequently, the revision petitioner herein filed the application to get set aside the ex-parte preliminary decree along with an application to get the delay of 244 days condoned in filing the said application. (ii) After hearing both sides, the lower Court dismissed the said application for getting the delay condoned.5. Being aggrieved by and dis-satisfied with the said order, this revision is focussed on vari...
The Chennai Port Trust, Rep. by Its Chairman, Vs. the Presiding Office ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. The petitioner is the Chennai Port Trust represented by its Chairman. The writ petition is filed by the Chennai Port Trust challenging the Award passed by the first respondent Industrial Tribunal in I.D.No.69 of 1995, dated 9.1.2001. By the impugned Award, the Industrial Tribunal set aside the termination order passed against the second respondent and directed his reinstatement with continuity of service and backwages. 2. The writ petition was admitted on 10.9.2001. This Court on the same day in WMP No.23995 of 2001 directed the management to deposit the last drawn wage of the second respondent from the date of dismissal till the order of reinstatement with further direction to pay last drawn wages from the date of Award. 50% of the amount so deposited was directed to be redeposited in fixed deposit in the Indian Bank, Esplanade Branch for three years and to be renewed periodically. The second respondent workman was permitted to withdraw the balance 50%. He was also given permission...
M.Unnikrishnan ... Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Appeal), and ors ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. Heard both sides.2. For the sake of convenience parties herein are referred to as the Management and the Employee.3. The first writ petition (W.P.No.16104/2000) was filed by the Employee (M.Unnikrishnan) against the order passed by the Deputy Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Appeal), the Appellate Authority constituted under Section 41(2) of the Tamilnadu Shops and Establishments Act 1947 (for short Shops Act) made in T.S.E.No.13 of 1997 dated 19.05.1999.4. By the impugned order, the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal filed by the Employee on the ground that there was a reasonable cause for dispensing with the services of the Employee on account of the closure of the Management's office at Chennai. That writ petition was admitted on 22.09.2000. Subsequently, the employee filed an application in WPMP No.23160 of 2001 to implead the third respondent, who is running the business of the Management at New Delhi. They were impleaded vide order dated 04.09.2003.5. During the pendency o...
Ramalingam .. Vs. the Presiding Officer, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, seeking to challenge the order of the first respondent Cooperative Tribunal, Cuddalore made in CMA No.80 of 2005, dated 19.7.2007, by which it had confirmed the order passed by the second respondent, dated 31.12.2002. The writ petition was admitted on 19.2.2008. Pending the writ petition, this court granted an interim stay after recording the statement of the counsel for the petitioner that there was no financial loss caused to the society and the property was with the society and the irregular appointees are continued to be in service. 2.Heard the arguments of Mr.C.R.Krishnamoorthy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.N.Senthilkumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for second respondent and Mr.R.Parthiban, learned counsel for third respondent. 3.The petitioner, who was a former President of the third respondent society, was issued with surcharge proceedings pursuant to an enquiry conducted under Section 81(1) of...
B.Chandrasekaran, and ors. Vs. Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation L ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. 22 petitioners herein have filed the present writ petition seeking to challenge the recorded minutes of discussions relating to demand No.8 held on 21.2.2001 and after quashing the same, to direct the respondent Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation to fill up vacancies arising in any region in respect of Class III and Class IV posts only on the basis of common Statewise seniority list from the cadre of Helpers. 2. The writ petition was admitted on 21.3.2001. Pending the writ petition, this court granted an interim stay of demand No.8 in the minutes of discussion held on 21.2.2001. Subsequently, the interim stay was made absolute on 20.8.2003. On notice, the respondent has filed a counter affidavit, dated 15.7.2009.3. It is the case of the petitioners that several trade unions functioning in the respondent corporation have entered into a settlement under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Conciliation, Chennai. With the said s...
M.P.Parthasarathy, and ors. Vs. the Chairman, State Bank of India, Cen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. In the first two writ petitions, a group of persons who are ex-employees of the State Bank of India have filed writ petitions, seeking for a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to revise the pension payable to the petitioners on the basis of last 12 months average salary drawn by them at the time of opting for retirement under SBI Voluntary retirement scheme by implementing the terms of circular, dated 11.1.2001 issued in this regard and consequently, revise the pension to be made effective from 1.4.2001 and also to give effect to enhanced pension in terms of the circular. 2.In W.P.No.8800 of 2009, there are 72 petitioners, who are seeking to challenge the rule 23 of the SBI Employees Pension Fund Rules dated 21.5.1997 and letter, dated 31.10.2000 as disclosed in MOU dated 25.2.2008 and minutes dated 16.10.2008 and after quashing the same, to direct the respondents to discharge the statutory obligation to pay pension from the date of retirement on a single uniform percentage ceiling of ...
Rieter-lmw Machinery Ltd. Vs.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. The petitioner is the management. They have filed the present writ petition seeking to challenge the order of the second respondent Appellate Authority made in TNSE Case No.3 of 1999, dated 13.09.2000.2.By the impugned order, the second respondent, who is the appellate authority under Section 41(2) of the Tamil Nadu Shops & Establishments Act, 1947 (for short TNSE Act) set aside the order of termination passed by the petitioner against the first respondent, dated 27.2.1999 and directed reinstatement of the first respondent. The writ petition was admitted on 22.09.2000. Pending the writ petition, an interim stay was granted for a limited period. Subsequently, it came to be extended from time to time and was finally made absolute after the workman filed the vacate stay application. 3.The facts leading to the case are as follows:The first respondent was appointed as a Technical Officer-II in the factory premises at Sulur Railway Feeder Road, Coimbatore, by an order, dated 15.11.1993. I...
Dr.P.Sureshkumar .. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu, and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. The writ petition came to be filed by a medical officer seeking to challenge the orders of the Government, dated 02.02.2009 and 06.03.2009. By the two orders, the State Government informed the petitioner that his resignation cannot be accepted due to dearth of hands of medical officers in Government hospitals. When the matter came up on 18.1.2010, the petitioner was asked to produce his terms of appointment. Though he produced it along with an additional typed set, dated 29.1.2010, but the bond produced by him was executed by some other candidate. The bond was to be signed by candidates who were granted stipend to undergo the PG course. Under the terms of the bond, a candidate must agree to serve in rural areas in Tamil Nadu for a period of five years on completion of the PG course, for which the candidate was selected. 2.The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Surgeon (Dental) in May, 1994 and was posted to the Government Hospital, Aruppukkotai. He underwent PG in M.D.S during...
Padmalakshmi Ammal ... Vs. the State of Tamilnadu, and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. The petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition, seeking for a direction to the first respondent to pass necessary orders under Section 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act retransferring the unutilised lands acquired for the purpose of "Sites and Services Scheme" of the second respondent from the petitioner of an extent of 0.15.76 hectares in S.No.107/2, Block No.21, Arumbakkam Village to the petitioner on receipt of the compensation amount paid in respect thereof.2. The writ petition was admitted on 31.12.2003 and notice was ordered to the respondents. On behalf of the second respondent, a counter affidavit dated 08.11.2008 was filed.3. The petitioner claimed that she was the owner of the property in S.No.107/2. The said land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act for the purpose of 'Sites and Service Scheme' of the TamilNadu Housing Board. The petitioner was paid a compensation of Rs.69,060/-. It was stated that from the date of 4(1) notification in the year 19...
P.G.Pattabi. Vs. Mythili, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-08-2010
1. Inveighing the order dated 21.01.2010 passed in E.P.No.269 of 2007 in I.A.No.656 of 1986 in O.S.No.947 of 1975 by the Additional Munsif Court, Vellore, this civil revision petition is focused.2. Broadly but briefly, narratively but precisely the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this civil revision petition would run thus: (i) O.S.No.947 of 1975 was filed by the original plaintiff-Thirunavukkarasu and on his death his LRs R1 to R5 herein came on record. Ultimately, the suit was decreed. The original defendant contested the matter on the ground that he was entitled to benefits under the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act and filed necessary I.A.also. (ii) The said suit and the application were tried together and ultimately the trial Court passed the judgement, the operative portion of it is extracted hereunder for ready reference: 18. Issue No.4: For the foregoing reasons, I hold that the defendant shall pay into Court a sum of Rs.26,187.25 withi...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »