Chennai Court December 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.
G.Sentil Selvan Vs. the Presiding Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-15-2011
The petitioner is a workman. In this writ petition, he has come forward to challenge an order passed by the Labour Court, Tiruchirappalli in I.A.No.26 of 2006 in I.D.No.73 of 1996, dated 01.12.2006. 2. By the impugned order, the Labour Court set aside the earlier exparte award made in I.D.No.73 of 1996 dated 28.05.1999. The workman aggrieved by the said order, came up before this Court with this writ petition. 3. In this writ petition notice of motion was ordered on 24.01.2007 returnable by four weeks and pending the notice period an interim stay was granted. There is nothing on record to show that the interim stay was extended subsequently by any order. 4. Not withstanding there being no stay order, the restored I.D.No.73 of 1996 is yet to be disposed of either on account of there was no Presiding Officer for the Labour Court for some time or the Labour Court had misunderstood, that since the matter was seized by this Court, it cannot proceed with the main Industrial Dispute. 5. In an...
M.Venugopal Vs. the Deputy Salt Commissioner and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-15-2011
This appeal arises out of the order dated 8.9.2009 made in Application No.711 of 2008 in C.S.No.16 of 2008 allowing the application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and referring the parties to arbitration. Plaintiff is the appellant. 2. Brief facts are that the appellant/plaintiff is the holder of Lease No.62 of Athipattu South Salt Factory lands covering an extent of 77.7950 acres leased to him in various survey numbers for the purpose of salt manufacture for the period of 20 years from 1.1.1988 to 31.12.2007. Subsequently, after transfer of certain portion of lands to North Madras Thermal Power Project and M/s.Venkatesh Coke Power Limited, the total area of land in Lease No.62 has been reduced to 73.6374 Acres. The lease expired on 31.12.2007. 3. Case of plaintiff is that even within the prescribed time of lease, on 31.5.2007, he applied for renewal of existing lease period through the Factory Officer of Athipattu South Salt Factory in the prescribed for...
The Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Kaveripoompattinam, Sirkgali ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Dec-15-2011
(The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Nagapattinam, alleging deficiency against the opposite parties and prayed for a direction against them to sanction loan amount for the academic year 2006-2007 to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.3,000/- as costs. The District Forum allowed the complaint partly and directed the opposite parties to grant Education loan, to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as costs. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite parties praying to set aside the order of the District Forum, Nagapattinam dated 20.01.2010 in C.C.No.68/2007. This appeal coming before us for final hearing on 09.12.2011 and on hearing the arguments of Appellants side and upon perusing the material records, this Commission made the following Order :) TMT.VASUGI RAMANAN, MEMBER : 1.Opposite parties 1 and 2 are the appellants. 2. The case of the complainant is as follows :- The complainant averred that she belonged to ...
Gowdhama Prabhakaran Vs. M/S.icici Lombar General Insurance Co. Ltd., ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Dec-15-2011
(The complainant filed a complaint before this Commission praying for a direction against the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.8,550/- with 18% interest p.a from 2.12.06 to 7.5.07, to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, pain and sufferings and to pay costs of the proceedings to the complainant. This complaint came before us for hearing finally on 09.12.2011. Upon perusing the material documents, and upon hearing the counsel for both sides, and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Commission made the following order.) TMT. VASUGI RAMANAN, MEMBER 1. The complaint filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act- 1986 The complainant has filed a consumer complaint before this Commission against the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service and prayed for a direction against them to pay Rs.8550/- with interest at 18% and to pay a compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- for mental agony pain and sufferings and to pay the costs. 2. The ...
Essakkiammal Vs. the Secretary to Government and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2011
(The Order of the Court was made by M.JAICHANDREN, J) This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order of the second respondent, dated 03.10.2011, made in No.14/BDFGISSV/2011, and quash the same, and to produce the detenu, namely, Arumugam, son of Karuppasamy Yadav, aged about 24 years, confined in the Central Prison, Palayamkottai, before this Court and to set him at liberty. 2. The petitioner has stated that the second respondent had passed the impugned detention order, dated 03.10.2011, under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug- Offenders, Forest-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act,1982. (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), read with the order issued by the State Government, in G.O.(D).No.122/Home, Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department, dated 18.07.2011, under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act, directing the de...
Rm.Subbiah Vs. S.Ramakrishnan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2011
These revisions were filed seeking to struck off the suits filed by the first respondent herein in O.S.No.2287 of 2000 pending on the file of the learned VIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, O.S.No.4602 of 1989 pending on the file of the learned XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai and O.S.No.10307 of 2010 pending on the file of the learned VI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The suit in O.S.No.2287 of 2000 was filed by the first respondent herein for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner herein from alienating or encumbering the suit property. 3. The suit in O.S.No.4602 of 1989 was filed by the first respondent for a declaration that the sale deed dated 14.12.1988, executed by the second respondent in favour of the petitioner is invalid, null and void and not binding on the first respondent herein. 4. The suit in O.S.No.10307 of 2010 was filed by the first respondent for a declaration that the first respondent herein is the absolute owner...
Arunachalam Vs. the State and anr
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2011
This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent, dated 29.9.2011, made in M.H.S.Confdl.No.63/2011, and quash the same, and to produce the detenu, namely, Suresh, son of Arunasalam, aged about 23 years, confined in the Central Prison, Palayamkottai, before this Court and to set him at liberty. 2. The petitioner has stated that the first respondent had passed the impugned detention order, dated 29.9.2011, under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug- Offenders, Forest-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act,1982. (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), read with the order issued by the State Government, in G.O.(D) No.127, Home Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department, dated 18.7.2011, under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act, directing the detention of Suresh, in the Central Prison, Palayamkottai, terming...
Kamalam Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2011
This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order of the second respondent, dated 28.09.2011, made in H.S.(M)Confdl.No.17 of 2011, and quash the same, and to produce the detenu, namely, Jesu @ Jesuraja, S/o.Durairaj, aged about 33 years, confined in the Central Prison, Palayamkottai, before this Court and to set him at liberty. 2. The petitioner has stated that the second respondent had passed the impugned detention order, dated 28.09.2011, under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug- Offenders, Forest-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982. (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), read with the order issued by the State Government, in G.O.(D).No.150, Home, Prohibition & Excuse (XVI) Department, dated 18.07.2011, under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act, directing the detention of Jesu @ Jesuraja, in the Central ...
Commissioner of Income Tax-i Vs. M/S.Aks Alloys(P) Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2011
The Revenue has preferred this tax case appeal as against the order dated 19.5.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'D' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.No.298/Mds/2009, suggesting the following substantial questions of law: “1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction u/s.80IB in respect of the unit at Pondicherrys even though the assessee had not complied with the mandatory provision for filing the Audit Report in Form 10CCB in support of the claim as stipulated in Section 80IB(13) r/w.Sec.80IA(7) of the Act, by observing that it was enough if the Audit Report was filed before the assessment was completed? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs.1,20,00,000/- made u/s.68 by the Assessing Officer being unexplained share application money credited in the assess...
Priya Vs. the District Collector and District and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2011
This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent, dated 30.9.2011, made in M.H.S.Confdl.No.65 of 2011, and quash the same, and to produce the detenu, namely, Ravi @ Karthickkumar, son of Selvaraj @ Govindhan Nadar, aged about 26 years, confined in the Central Prison, Palaymkottai, before this Court and to set him at liberty. 2. The petitioner has stated that the first respondent had passed the impugned detention order, dated 30.9.2011, under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug- Offenders, Forest-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act,1982. (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), read with the order issued by the State Government, in G.O.(D) No.127, Home, Prohibition, Excise (XVI) Department, dated 18.7.2011, under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act, directing the detention of Ravi @ Karthickkumar, i...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »