Chennai Court July 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.
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd., Through Its Regional Manager (Mar ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
(The 1st Respondents as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the Appellant and 1st Respondent /Complainant, praying for the direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.5 lakhs as compensation. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.03.7.2003 in COP No.209/2001.) M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The 1st and 2nd opposite parties are the appellants. 2. The 1st respondent in this appeal, as complainant has filed a case, on the following grounds, seeking a direction, for the payment of Rs.5 lakhs, leveling deficiency/unfair trade practice, against the opposite parties. 3. The complainant, in order to construct a building, had purchased 400 bags of cement, on 19.9.00, and 29.10.00, for a sum of Rs.71,884/-, from the 3rd opposite party/dealer, the cement being manufactured by opposite parties 1 and 2. The complainant, following the procedure, using the good ...
Poompukar Finance and Investments, Rep. by Its Managing Partner and Ot ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
(The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the Appellants / opposite parties praying for the direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.75000/- towards the deposit amount with 24% interest and compensation of Rs.50000/- and cost. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.30.5.2007 in C.O.P.No.53/2006.) M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The opposite parties are the appellants 2. The complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.1 lakh, with the1st opposite party financial institution on 17.11.99, under receipts No.311 and 312, for 5 years, wherein the opposite parties have agreed to pay interest @ 24% p.a. At the request of the complainant, on 17.12.2001, they have returned back a sum of Rs.25000/-, leaving the balance of Rs.75000/- with them. The opposite parties have also paid interest upto 17.12.2001. At request of the opposite parties, the complain...
The Executive Engineer and Administrative Officer Vs. G. Ilangovan
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
(The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the Appellant / opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to pay Rs.3,59,500/- alongwith compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. The District Forum allowed the complaint. For not complying the said, order, an Execution Petition was filed by the complainant, in which order has been passed sentencing the opposite party to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.7.4.2006 in EP No.1/20006 in C.O.P.No.30 /2005.) M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The respondent / opposite party, in EP.1/2006 in O.P.No.30/2005, on the file of District Forum, Tuticorin, is the appellant. 2. The respondent in this appeal, as complainant, obtained an order in OP.No.30/2005, on the file of District Forum, Tuticorin, directing the opposite party/ appellant, to execute the sale deed, in respect of the house, which he...
Baskaran. Vs. the Inspector of Police, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. This petitioner seeks a direction to the second respondent herein to depute a competent investigating officer to take up the complaint dated 23.02.2010 given to the second respondent and register a case based on the complaint.2. The petitioner informs that he was forcibly taken by police in plain clothes at about 6.45 a.m. on 16.02.2010 from the residence of his employer. He was pushed into a van and his two wheeler was also taken along. The petitioner further informs that his eyes were tied with a cloth and a gun was kept at his hip, threatening to put an end to his life and thereafter he was taken to an undisclosed place somewhere near ECR road. After reaching the said place, he was severely attacked with lathies, keeping him in a room. He was also attacked severely by some other police men, who already were stationed there and that while beating him severely, the Head of the Police team which kidnapped the petitioner had insisted and forced him to admit that he abetted a crime co...
K.C.Chandrasekar. Vs. C.Balasundaram.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. Animadverting upon the order dated 18.01.2010 passed in RCA No.1590 of 2004 by the VIII Small Causes Court, Chennai, confirming the order dated 16.11.2004 passed in RCOP No.1773 of 1999 by the XIV Small Causes Court, Chennai, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. Heard both sides.3. The facts giving rise to the filing of this civil revision petition as stood exposited from the records would run thus:(i) The respondent herein filed the RCOP invoking Section 10(3)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] on the ground of additional accommodation for expanding his business. The matter was contested. (ii) During enquiry, on the side of the landlord, the respondent herein examined himself as P.W.1 along with P.W.2/Ajis Mohideen and marked Exs.P1 to P12. On the side of the tenant, the revision petitioner examined himself as R.W.1 and marked Exs.R1 to R6. Ultimately the Rent Controller ordered eviction. Being aggrieved b...
C.Ponnusamy. Vs. Muniammal (Deceased), and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. Animadverting upon the order dated 17.02.2010 passed in M.P.No.2 of 2010 in M.P.No.370 of 2007 in E.P.S.R.No.17866 of 2006 in RCOP No.215 of 2001 by the learned XV Judge, Small Causes Court at Madras, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. Heard both sides.3. A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision would run thus:(i) One deceased Muniammal filed RCOP No.215 of 2001 as against Ponnsuamy, the revision petitioner herein and got an order of eviction, whereupon, RCA was filed. Even before the serving of notice of appeal it was found that Muniammal died, so to say after she having obtained eviction order in the RCOP. In such circumstances, the learned counsel who appeared for the appellant Ponnsamy was constrained to make an endorsement that in view of Muniammal having died issueless and without leaving any legal heirs, the appeal could be taken as abated. Whereupon, the lower Court also passed suitable or...
The Management, Vs. the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, and Ors,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. Heard both sides. Original files from the lower authority was directed to be summoned and circulated for reference.2. This writ petition was filed by the management of Thoothukudi Agricultural Producers Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, challenging the order of the first respondent appellate authority under the Tamil Nadu Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act, 1981 dated 31.12.2003 in PSA No.2 of 2003. 3. The third respondent herein was working as a Salesman in the Society, who was arrested on 12.3.1997 and a criminal case was registered against him by the Civil Supplies CID for irregularities in the ration shop run by the society. Subsequently, he was placed under suspension with effect from 12.3.1997. His suspension order was revoked on 18.6.1997. He was directed to be placed in the wine shop with monthly salary of Rs.1800/-. Even while he was working in the place, the local people were aggrieved by his antisocial activities. He started absconding himself. When the management ...
C.Pitchai. Vs. the Secretary to Government, and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. The petitioner initially entered the service as Police Constable on 04.12.62 in the erstwhile Malabar Special Police III Battalion. Later on, he was transferred to District Armed Reserve, Vellore District in the year 1968. He was further promoted as Sub-Inspector of Police in the year 1985. Whileso, the petitioner was issued with a charge memo under Rule 3(b) of Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 in PR.No.136/97 for gross dereliction of duty in losing the magazine of revolver and three ammunition on 13.12.96, when he was sent for escort duty for three central prisoners to 17th Court in Chennai in Police Van TN 23-G-0036 and also for another charge of gross dereliction of duty in not preferring any complaint at police station about the loss of magazine and 3 rounds of ammunitions and delay in lodging the complaint on 27.12.96, though he was directed on 25.12.96 to lodge a complaint. Subsequently, he was found guilty of the above said charges, fo...
K.Govindaraj ... Vs. K.Thangavel, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. This appeal is filed by the claimant against the Judgment and Decree dated 19.07.2006 in M.C.O.P. No.329/2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate Court) Erode.2. In the claim petition, it is stated that on 31.07.2005 at about 1.30 p.m. the appellant / claimant was travelling as a pillion rider in Bajaj CD 100 motor cycle bearing Regn.No.TN 33 AX 2703 which was driven by one Moorthy on the Erode to Poondurai Main Road, from east to west direction in a moderate speed and on the extreme left side of the road and a Mini Dor Auto bearing Regn. No.TN 33 AZ 3220 hailing from opposite direction namely west to east direction driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the claimant's motor cycle. In the result, the claimant and the rider of the motor cycle were thrown out of the road and sustained multiple grievous injuries. In the accident, the claimant sustained the following injuries -[a] Lacerated crush injury right knee...
SarojA. Vs. Special Tahsildar, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. Heard.2. This Appeal Suit is filed under Section 96 of the CPC challenging the judgment and decree in LAOP No.313 of 1987, dated 27.4.1993 on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee.3. The lands in Survey Nos.82/5 and 105/1B to an extent of 27 cents and 28 cents were acquired in Kadapperi Village for the purpose of setting up Madras Export Processing Zone. In respect of Survey No.82/5, the compensation was worked out to Rs.5818.55 and in respect of Survey No.105/1B, the compensation was worked out to Rs.6034.05. Since there was a dispute regarding the ownership of the land between the appellant and the second respondent, the matter was referred for determination of the dispute under Section 30 read with S.31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. On reference, the same was registered as LAOP No.313 of 1997. 4. The first claimant is the second respondent herein and the second claimant is the appellant herein. The first claimant filed a claim statement, dated 27.12.1989 stating that two parce...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »