Chennai Court January 2011 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.
Management of Cambodia Mills Vs. the Presiding Officer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
COMMON ORDER1. The petitioner/Mills in W.P.No.957 of 2003, has filed the writ petition seeking a Writ of Certiorari in calling for the records of the first respondent in Claim Petition Nos.446 to 462 of 2000 dated 07.02.2002 and to quash the same.2. The petitioner/Mills in W.P.No.14393 of 2003, has filed the writ petition seeking a Writ of Certiorari in calling for the records of the first respondent in Claim Petition Nos.292 to 363 of 2000 and 217 to 299 of 2001 dated 07.02.2002 and to quash the same.3. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner/Mills (in W.P.No.957 of 2003), in respect of the period between April 1998 and September 1999, there have been power failure on number of days and because of the power cut imposed by the Government, the operation of the Mills has to be stopped during that period when the power has not been made available and as such, the petitioner/Mills has not been in a position to provide work to the workmen.4. It is the contention of the learned C...
The Divisional Railway Manager Vs. Presiding Officer and ors .
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
ORDER1. W.P.No.23044 of 2006 is filed by the Divisional Railway Manager, challenging the order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in I.D.No.274 of 2004 dated 15th December 2005. W.P.No.24473 of 2006 is filed by a dismissed temporary employee against the order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court dated 12.06.2001 in I.D.NO.28 of 2001. The petitioner in W.P.No.24473 of 2006 seeks a direction to the respondent Management to reinstate the petitioner in service with effect from 28.08.1992 with all consequential benefits, including arrears and back-wages for the period during which the petitioner was kept out of employment and giving other attendant service benefits to which the petitioner would be entitled to in law. It may be noted that in both these writ petitions, the employee concerned was taken in service as Substitute Bungalow Lascar.2. The issues raised in both these writ petitions are substantially same as to and when an order of...
A and F Overseas Trade Limited Vs. Regional Director and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
COMMON ORDER1. The petitioner in these three writ petitions is one and the same Company. They have filed the present writ petition seeking to challenge the recovery notices issued by the respondent ESI Corporation, dated 2.3.2005 in respect of the contribution for the period from 1985-86 to 1999-2000, then 4/01 to 3/03, 4/04 and 5/04. In the notices, the petitioners were informed that in addition to the amount payable, they are also liable to pay interest under Section 39(5)(a) and other costs. 2.The first writ petition was admitted on 15.3.2005. Pending the writ petition, the court granted an interim injunction on the same day. The second writ petition was admitted on 17.3.2005 and the court granted an interim injunction on the same day. The third writ petition was admitted on 18.3.2005 and on the same day, an interim injunction was also granted. 3.On notice from this court, the respondents have filed a counter affidavit, dated 16.10.2006. The contention raised by the petitioner was t...
Puducherry Elite Distilleries Vs. the Secretary and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 2nd March, 2010, passed in W.P. No.17193/2009, whereby learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition refusing to issue any direction upon the respondents for grant of a Small Scale Industry Provisional Certificate for starting an Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) Unit in the Union Territory of Puducherry.2. Earlier, the petitioner had filed W.P.26201/2008 seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to register the petitioner's unit in the name of Puducherry Elite Distilleries during October, 2008 in a particular place. However, in the course of hearing, it was submitted that the petitioner-appellant would be satisfied if their application submitted on 14th July, 2008, seeking issuance of a Small Scale Industry Certificate is considered by the respondents within a given time. The earlier writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the same on its own merit and in accordance with law. Co...
T.R.iswaran Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
ORDER1. The amended prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the order passed by the first respondent dated 13.01.1989 and 02.08.1981 and to direct the second respondent to pay the petitioner's salary and emoluments as that of post graduate headmaster with effect from 01.07.1978 till his retirement on 31.05.1992 with interest.2. The case of the petitioner is that he obtained his B.A. degree in Geography during 1958 and subsequently, completed degree course in teaching from the Teachers College, Saidapet, Chennai. The petitioner was employed as a teacher and worked as headmaster between 1963 and 1966 in Meenakshisundaram High School, Idakal in Tenkasi Taluk and from 1966 to 1968 worked as B.T. Assistant in Theerthapathi High School, Ambasamudaram and subsequently as headmaster in the S.N.Ramaswami Raja High School, Gomathipuram between 1968 to 1976. During 1976, he joined the Tilak Vidyalaya High School, Kallidaikuruchi, the fifth respond...
V.Krishnamoorthy Vs. Balakrishnan and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
O R D E R1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the plaintiff in O.S.No.248 of 2009 before the Vacation Civil Judge (DMC), Coimbatore.2. The petitioner had filed O.S.No.273 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Coimbatore against his brother, the 2nd respondent herein for delivery of possession of the suit properties. In the said suit, Schedule 'D' is the property in dispute in the present proceedings. He got an ex parte decree in the said case on 31.07.200. He levied execution proceedings in E.P.No.133 of 2002 on the file of the above said Court for delivery. In the execution proceedings also, the 2nd respondent did not appear and delivery was ordered by the Court. When the Court Amin came to deliver the property in favour of this petitioner, the 2nd respondent obstructed and thereafter he came with a suit before the Vacation Civil Court, Coimbatore impleading this petitioner and 2nd respondent in a suit which was subsequently transferred to the Trial C...
The Proprietor Vs. Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
:COMMON ORDER1. Since common issues are involved in all these Writ Petitions, they were heard together and are disposed of by means of this Common Order by consent of all the learned counsels.2. These Writ Petitions are filed by the Proprietors, M/s.Sulaimaniya Bone Mill, M/s.Regina Package Industries and M/s.Palayathar Bone Mill respectively challenging the order of the Appellate Authority, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, dated 08.09.2010 made in Appeal Nos.78, 77 and 79 of 2010, confirming the order dated 28.04.2010 passed by the first respondent and for a consequential direction to the first respondent to issue renewal of consent order for the year 2010 - 2011.3. The short facts necessary for the disposal of the Writ Petitions are as follows:-(i).The petitioners bone Crushing Unit are functioning from 01.11.1986, 01.05.1998 and 14.12.1957 respectively in their respective premises. The petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.13273 of 2010 is producing crushed bone 25 tonne per month from raw b...
M.M.Rubber Company Ltd. Vs. the Deputy Director and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
ORDER1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking to challenge an order, dated 6.12.2004 passed under Section 45-A of the Employees' State Insurance Act (for short ESI Act) by the respondent ESI Corporation. By the said order, the petitioner was directed to make a contribution of Rs.4,39,028/- in respect of the period 1997-98 and 1998-99. The petitioner being the principal employer was directed to make good the amounts together with interest. The said order was not challenged in any proceedings under Section 75 of the ESI Act as required under law. Pursuant to the order passed under Section 45-A, the respondents issued notice proposing to attach the property of the petitioner and also threatened them with coercive action to recover the amount.2.It is claimed by the petitioner that subsequent to the order passed by the respondents, they have paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- by a demand draft, dated 6.1.2005 and Rs.2,89,028/- by a further demand draft, dated 28.1.2005, altoge...
M.Vijayalakshmi Vs. T.Shanmugam and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
J U D G M E N T1. This second appeal is focussed by the plaintiff, animadverting upon the judgement and decree dated 30.09.2009, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Ranipet in A.S.No.25 of 2009 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Munsif, Ranipet dated 28.01.2009 in O.S.No.12 of 2008.2. The parties are referred to here under according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff. Whereas, despite printing the name of the learned counsel for the respondents, there is no representation.4. The epitome and the long and short of the relevant facts, absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this Second Appeal would run thus: a) The plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No.12 of 2008 seeking the following reliefs:(a) For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties describ...
United India Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Poongodi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-12-2011
1. The insurance company has come forward with this appeal questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the court below at Rs.3,95,000/- in favour of the claimants/respondents 1 to 5 herein for the death of the deceased Manokaran as against the claim of Rs.10,00,000/- made in the claim petition.2. The facts which led to the filing of the claim petition was that on 17.01.2004 at about 10.30 hours, at Sandamangalam Main Road, in a well opposite to Sellappa Colony diversion road, the deceased was driving a Tourist Taxi vehicle bearing Registration No. TN-28-K-3334, which was owned by the first respondent/sixth respondent in this appeal. According to the claimants, even though the deceased drove the vehicle carefully, in order to avoid dashing against a cyclist, the deceased turned the vehicle to the further left side of the road and lost control, with the result, he plunged into the well along with the vehicle and he died on the spot. At the time of the accident, the deceased was ag...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »