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.
M/S.United Visa Services Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J. 1. Since the issues involved in all these writ petitions are identical, they were heard together and disposed of by this common order. Though varied prayers have been sought for in these writ petitions, all the petitioners seek to forbear the respondents from in any manner preventing them from submitting fresh passport applications and other applications for miscellaneous services through online for and on behalf of the passport applicants and from visiting the Passport Seva Kendras (PSKs) along with the applicants for the purpose of assisting them. 2. The petitioner in W.P.No.21715 of 2011 is an Association whose members are stated to be travel agents. The other writ petitions have been filed by individual travel agents. 3. According to the petitioners, travel agents were recognized by the Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi and the Regional Passport Office. The Ministry of External Affairs, by a Circular, dated 24.7.1992, withdrew the system of recognizing tra...
S.Kuppusamy Vs. the Director of Collegiate Education and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
1.The petitioner who was an Associate Professor in the Department of Maths in the third respondent college, on retirement of one Mr.R.Lawrence Joseph Manoharan as the Head of the Department of Maths on 31.5.2011, sent an application dated 10.6.2011 to designate him as the Head of the Department of Maths being the senior most person in the department and by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.1785, Education Department, dated 05.12.1988. He also sent a similar letter to the first respondent the Director of Collegiate Education, Chennai. When he did not get any reply and when he found that the fourth respondent was designated as the Head of the Department by the third respondent, he has filed the present writ petition. 2.The prayer in the writ petition is for to forbear the second respondent, i.e. the Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Tiruchirappalli Region from approving the appointment of the fourth respondent as the Head of the Department of Maths in the third respondent college and for a direc...
Mrs.A.Kokila Mani Vs. the District Educational Officer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
1. The petitioner, A.Kokila Mani, has filed the present writ petition seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the proceedings of the first respondent in reference No.Muu.Mu.No.4927/A4/2010, dated 20.12.2010 and order No.Na.Ka.No.10344/A4/2010, dated 03.01.2011 and Proceedings of the third respondent in reference No.Na.Ka.No.118489/W5/E1/10, dated 09.08.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Post Graduate Teacher in Mathematics with effect from 20.09.2010 with all monetary and service benefits. 2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed as B.T. Assistant in Mathematics in the fourth respondent school on 04.06.1990. After acquiring 20 years of service as B.T. Assistant in Mathematics subject, ...
Prof.K.V.Rajendran Vs. the Superintendent of Police and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking a direction from this Court to transfer the further investigation in Crime No.1 of 2004 pending on the file of CBCID, Nagapattinam, from the first and second respondent herein to the file of the fourth respondent. 2. According to the petitioner, he has been working as an Associate Professor in Physics in the Presidency College, Chennai after finishing his M.Sc., and M.Phil., in Madras University. The petitioner belongs to Tharangampadi Village in Nagapattinam District where his parents and brothers were living. It is the case of the petitioner that on the date of occurrence i.e., on 26.08.1998, when he went to his Village in the late evening and at about 11.00 p.m., around ten people headed by the then RDO forcibly took him into the Government jeep and then took him to the Taluk office and enquired him as to why he gave false complaint regarding smuggling of teakwood in that area. 3. Further, it is the case of the petitioner...
Gnanawathi Vs. the Secretary and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
The petitioner is the wife of one Murugesan, who is the life convict and lodged in Central Prison, Palayamkottai and his convict number is 6789. The petitioner's husband was convicted in Crime No.300 of 1984 on the file of the Mathiyapagam Police Station, Thoothukudi. He was tried before the Sessions court, Tirunelveli in S.C. Case No.95 of 1985 and was awarded death sentence for the offence involved under Sections 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The matter was taken on appeal to this court being Criminal Appeal No.926 of 1985, wherein the conviction was confirmed and the sentence was modified to one of life sentence. In this writ petition, she has sought for a direction to the first respondent State to treat that her husband was eligible for pre-mature release in terms of G.O.Ms.No.873, Home (Prison IV) Department, dated 14.09.2006 and G.O.Ms.No.1326, Home (Prison IV) Department, dated 12.09.2007. 2.When the matter came up on 16.12.2010, this court had ordered notice of motion. Pending ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. S and S Power Switchgear Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
R.SUBBIAH, J., This appeal is directed, at the instance of the Revenue, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench 'C', dated 02.02.2007 made in I.T.A.No. 1849/Mds/2003. 2. The appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law; (i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenses incurred in the foreign travel of the Chairman's wife is to be allowed as a business expenditure ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on the amount paid on the sale and lease back transaction ? 3. The assessee is a company and its business is that of manufacture and sale of circuit breakers, isolators, etc. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 1996-97 with the relevant previous year ending 31st March, 1996, on 26.12.1997, declaring an income of Rs.3,09,57,430/- and the same was process...
A.Venkatachalapathy Vs. the Secretary and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging an Award passed by the District Collector, rejecting the claim made by the petitioner for enhancement of compensation, for the land acquired from him. 2. I have heard Mr.R.R.Kannan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.K.K.Senthilvelan, learned Assistant Solicitor General for respondents 1 and 3 and Mr.M.Alagudevan, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents 2 and 4. 3. For the purpose of expansion of the Bangalore-Salem-Madurai National Highways into a four-way road, certain lands were acquired by the Government in pursuance of a notification issued under Section 3-A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 published in the Gazette dated 8.10.2007. The newspaper publications were made on 23.11.2007. The declaration under Section 3-D(1) was published on 30.4.2008. The enquiry under Section 3G(3) was held by the District Revenue Officer on 2.6.2008. 4. Two pieces of land belonging to the petitioner, measuring ab...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S.Sundaram Finance Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
R.SUBBIAH, J., 1. These Tax Case Appeals are directed, at the instance of the Revenue, in respect of the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98, against the common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench 'B', dated 23.08.2006, made in I.T.A.Nos.1974/Mds/2000 and 887/Mds/2001. 2. Both the appeals were admitted on the following substantial questions of law: (1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that collection of contingency deposit against payment of sales tax would not form part of the income ? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the depreciation on leased assets can be allowed in a year when the assets had not yet been put to use by the lessee ? Substantial question of law No:1 3. The first question, namely, whether the collection of 'contingency deposit' by the assessee against the payment of sales tax, would form part of the income or not, is no mor...
Selvam Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
1. This revision arises against the order of the learned Special Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chengalpattu, passed in Crl.M.P.No.1025 of 2011 in Special Case No.4 of 2008 dated 08.08.2011. 2. A case stands registered against the petitioner in Crime No.13/AC/06 for offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act on the allegation that he accepted a bribe of Rs.750/- from one Rajalakshmi Ammal on 06.11.2006 at his office premises. Pursuant thereto, the residence of the petitioner was searched and an amount of Rs.6,07,500/-was seized. Presently, charge sheet stands filed in the case in Crime No.13/AC/06 and it is pending trial in Special Case No.4 of 2008. Initially, though a case in Crime No.24/AC/2007 for offence u/s.13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was registered against the petitioner for holding assets disproportionate to his known source of income, further action in respect thereof was dropped. 3. The Court below has dismissed t...
M/S. Amk and Co. Vs. Deputy Chief Materials Manager and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2011
1. The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition challenging a demand made by the first respondent herein for payment of ground rent, for allowing extension of time to them to take delivery of the material purchased by them in an auction held by the respondents. 2. I have heard Mr.C.K.Rajan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Radhakrishnan, learned senior counsel for the respondents. 3. The first respondent herein published an auction catalogue in their website for a public auction to be held on 19.01.2010 at the Combined Scrap Stores Depot, Golden Rock. The catalogue contained 72 items proposed to be auctioned. Each of those items was described seriatim, such as GAJ1, GAJ2, etc., upto GAJ-72. 4. Lot No.64 indicated by code word “GAJ64” was described in the catalogue as follows: Auction Lot No. PL No. Lot Qty Sale unit No. Description -------- ------------------------------- --------- ---------- GAJ64 058300909 98032252 4.000 NUMBER LOC. AT BRIDGE NO.633 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »