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. Kandavel Vs. Branch Manager, (Tamilnadu) State Express Transport Co ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2011
(The appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 28.09.2011, upon hearing the arguments of both sides and perused the documents, written submissions as well as the order of the District Forum, this Commission made the following order :-) A.K.ANNAMALAI, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. 2. Complainant traveled in the 1st opposite partys State Transport Express Bus, Ultra Delux bus in which 2nd and 3rd opposite parties are driver and conductor. On 10.12.09 from Trichy to Pumba on payment of Rs.340/- started at 22.00 hours from Trichy and after reaching Dindigul due to certain repair the bus could not be proceeded further and thereby the 2nd and 3rd opposite parties have not made any alternative arrangements and thereafter the complainant on his own alternative arrangements reached the Pumba with delay of several hours and thereby the opposite parties are deficiency in service and after returning from the place on 15.12.06 when he questioned th...
Yasi Begam Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
(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 27.08.2011, made in C.P.O/T.C/I.S./D.O.No.22/2011, and quash the same, and to produce the detenu, namely, Jagir Hussain, son of Abdul Rasheed, confined in the Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli, 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 27.08.2011, 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.121, Home, Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department, dated 18.07.2011, under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act, directing the detention ...
K.Kalaikumar Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
This petition has been filed by the petitioner/defacto complainant, seeking for the transfer of investigation from the file of 5th respondent police, to the file of either 6th respondent or 7th respondent in crime No.139 of 2011 on file of 5th respondent police. 2.The brief facts, which are mentioned in the petition are as follows; (i) The petitioner is working as Headmaster of Sri Arulmigu Pragadhambal Government Higher Secondary School, Pudukkottai and his wife is also working as Teacher in Sandhaipettai Girls Higher Secondary School, Pudukkottai. The petitioner's second daughter viz., Abarna, deceased aged about 15 years was studying in 10th standard. On 09.03.2011, the petitioner and his wife had gone to their school and their daughter Aparna and son Nishanth were at the home. On the same day, the petitioner received a phone call from his neighbour and rushed to his home, where they found that his daughter Aparna was killed by someone and she was found stabbed with sharp weapons bo...
Union of India Vs. Tribhovandas Vendravan and Brothers and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
This Original Side Appeal arises out of the order dated 03.12.2008 made in O.P.No.568 of 2007 filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, confirming the award passed by the learned Arbitrator on 01.10.2006 granting the relief to the first respondent by directing the Appellant/Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.61,45,000/- with interest at the rate of 15% per annum from 29.04.2000 on the said amount of Rs.61,45,000/- till the date of award and thereafter, at 12% per annum till the date of payment and to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards costs. 2.First respondent herein as Claimant, is a registered partnership firm and the owner of the premises bearing D.No.184, Tiruchirapalli Road, Coimbatore-45. The first respondent/Claimant leased out the said building to the Appellant/Petitioner herein 40 years back and the said lease was renewed from time to time. The last of the renewals was on 01.04.1996 on a monthly rent of Rs.65,000/- for a period of three years. The leased...
C.S.S. Corp Private Limited Vs. Space Matrix Design Consultants
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
This appeal arises out of the order in A.No.2661 of 2011 [19.09.2011] directing the Appellant to furnish security for a sum of Rs.4,56,22,368/-. 2. Respondent is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of providing interior design, project management and architectural consultancy services to its customers in India. Respondent had agreed to undertake interior works for Appellant as a contractor for the premises on the ground floor, 9th and 10th floors located at AMBIT IT PARK, Ambattur, Chennai. In this connection, Respondent had executed an agreement with the Appellant on 03.03.2010 detailing the terms of engagement, including the conditions for payment of the consideration. The project involved Interior Fit-outs, Finishes, MEP, Network and Allied Civil Works of the Project Site. Agreement dated 03.03.2010 states that it is a “Design and Build”. Case of Respondent is that it was a “lump sum” agreement for consideration of Rs.13,10,97,371/-. Further cas...
N.Soorya Alias Ranjith Alias Sekar Vs. the Union of India and ors
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order of the third respondent, dated 19.2.2011, made in N.S.A.Detention Order No.1/2011, and quash the same, and to produce the detenu, namely, N.Soorya @ Ranjith @ Sekar, aged about 26 years, confined in the Central Prison, Madurai, before this Court and to set him at liberty. 2. The petitioner has stated that the third respondent had passed the impugned detention order, dated 19.2.2011, under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980, (Central Act 65 of 1980) read with the orders issued by the State Government, in G.O.Ms.No.43 Public (Law and Order-F) Department, dated 10.01.2011, under sub-section (3) of section 3 of the said Act, directing his detention, in the Central Prison, Madurai. 3. Even though various grounds had been raised in the Habeas Corpus Petition filed by the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had placed emphasis on the grounds, ...
The Management Vs. the Joint Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation) and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
The petitioner is a State owned Transport Corporation having its Headquarters at Madurai. In this writ petition, the petitioner corporation has challenged the order of the first respondent, the Commissioner of Labour, (Conciliation), Chennai, made in Approval Petition No.86 of 2005, dated 05.01.2007. 2. By the impugned order, the first respondent declined to grant approval to the dismissal, vide order dated 23.05.2005, of the second respondent, who was employed as a driver in the petitioner corporation. 3. The writ petition was admitted on 22.10.2008. Pending the writ petition, this Court granted an interim stay. On notice from this Court, the second respondent filed two applications namely M.P.(MD).Nos.1 and 2 of 2009 seeking to vacate the interim stay and also payment under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act. These two applications were heard along with the stay application and on 18.01.2010, this Court directed the payment of last drawn wages in terms of Section 17-B of the...
Authorised Officer Vs. R. Krishnasamy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
This writ petition at the instance of the State Bank of India, Udumalpet Branch, questions the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal dated 17.11.2011, wherein and whereby, the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal set aside the sale of immovable properties, conducted by the petitioner - Bank on 3.7.2007. 2. The facts leading to the present writ petition are as follows:- The first respondent - the proprietor of M/s. Vijayadeep & Giri Cloth Stores, Udumalpet availed cash credit facilities from the petitioner- Bank and deposited the title deeds relating to his immovable properties for creation of mortgage. As there was default in re-payment of the debts, the Bank classified the debts of respondents 1 to 5 as “Non Performing Asset” on 30.10.2003. The petitioner-Bank also filed O.A.No.333 of 2004 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and a recovery certificate was also issued for a sum of Rs.20,28,005/-. 3. Pursuant to the recovery certificate, the petitioner - Bank is...
K.Subramanian Vs. the District Collector and District Magistrate and a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
(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 first respondent, dated 11.07.2011, made in M.H.S. Confidential No.28/2011, and quash the same, and to produce the detenu, namely, Muthusamy @ Puli, Son of Karuthapandi Thevar, aged about 27 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 11.07.2011, 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.66, Home, Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department, dated 18.04.2011, under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act...
C.Chandra Kumar Vs. the Union of India and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-2011
The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider his name and post him in any one of the higher posts commensurate with his educational qualifications with effect from 02.08.2006. 2. In this writ petition, notice of motion was ordered on 24.02.2010. Pending the writ petition, no interim order was granted though a direction application was filed in M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2010. 3. On notice from this Court on behalf of the respondents a counter affidavit dated 16.06.2010 was filed together with a typed set of documents in support of the averments made in the counter affidavit. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit dated 17.06.2011 and also an additional typed set of papers. 4. Though the petitioner initially appointed a counsel to file a writ petition, subsequently a change of vakalat was filed by another counsel on 21.06.2011. Thereafter, when the matter came up on 19.10.2011, the petitioner filed a memo revoking the vakalat of...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »