Chennai Court December 2011 Judgments
Thiru Arooran Sugars Limited Vs. Tamil Nadu Co-operative Sugar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree in C.S.No.426 of 1998 [15.06.2009] whereby the learned Judge decreed the suit for a sum of Rs.31,25,750.68 with further interest and cost being the differential cost/loss incurred by the Respondent-Plaintiff on account of failure of the Appellant-Defendant to lift the molasses allotted to them. 2. Case of Respondent-Plaintiff is that Appellant-Defendant is a regular purchaser of molasses from the member Mills of Plaintiff Federation and had participated in a number of tenders conducted by the Plaintiff. In Ex.P2-letter [16.12.1994], Appellant-Defendant had confirmed the request for allotment of 30,000 MTs of molasses. In pursuant to the said letter of request, under Ex.P3-letter No.R.C.45337/C2/94 dated 21.1.1995, the Commissioner of Sugar issued an order for lifting 1500 MTs of molasses from M/s.MRK Co-op Sugar Mills and 2000 MTs from M/s.NPKRR Co-op Sugar Mills at the rate of Rs.1300/- per MT. In pursuance to Exs.P2 and P3, Plaintiff Federat...
Tag this Judgment!V.Ganesan and ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
This writ petition has been filed seeking a prayer for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to fix the scale of pay to the petitioners as per G.O.Ms.No.234, School Education (G2) Department, dated 10.09.2009 counting entire length of service as a elementary school Headmaster for selection grade and Special grade and confer all consequential benefits. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that prior to 01.06.1988, the post of Primary School Headmaster and the post of Secondary Grade Teacher were constituted in one classification in Class III of Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu Elementary Education Subordinate Service because the basic scale of pay for the post of Primary School Headmaster and the Secondary Grade Teacher was identical viz., Rs.610-1075. The teachers who were appointed as Headmasters of the Primary School were entitled to get a Special Allowance of Rs.15/- only. As there was no separate scale of pay for the said post, th...
Tag this Judgment!Rajagopal Vs. Forest Range Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
1. The accused in C.C.No.58/2004 on the file of Special Judicial Magistrate, Tirupattur seeks quashing of the order dated 31.08.2006 of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vellore remanding back the said calendar case to the Special Judicial Magistrate, Tirupattur. 2. According to Mr. S. Baskaran, learned counsel for the petitioner, once the trial court referred the case under section 325 CrPC to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vellore for imposing severe sentence, again the Chief Judicial Magistrate cannot remand back the case to the referral Magistrate. In support of his proposition, Mr. Baskaran cited In re Sundalamada Kudumban [AIR (29) 1942 Madras 281 (2)]. Thus, he would submit that the impugned order dated 31.08.2006 of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate is required to be quashed. 3. Mrs. MF. Shabana, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that even the Chief Judicial Magistrate to whom the case was sent, has to deal with the case in accordance with the provis...
Tag this Judgment!The Secretary Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
The petitioner is an aided middle school at Solaiyalagupuram, Madurai 11. Admittedly, the petitioner is a non minority school governed by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 and Rules framed thereunder. 2.The school which was originally run as primary school and subsequently upgraded as middle school with the specific condition for standards 6 to 8 the school will have to run as self financing basis. Admittedly, the upgradation was done after the amendment made to the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, by Tamil Nadu Act 11 of 1999 by introducing Section 14-A in the Act. 3.By the newly introduced provision, the private school managements were clearly informed that any private school starts any further classes or courses or upgradation, the grant will not be paid only on the ground that has been recognised by the State Government in a sense that the obligation of the State Government to provide grant was frozen upto the year 1991 -...
Tag this Judgment!Meena and ors. Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
In all these writ petitions, the petitioners claim was that they are trained cook having got their names not only registered in the employment exchange long before but also on the basis of the experience certificate produced from different private mess/hotels, they have got their names registered as priority candidates. Notwithstanding their names were under the priority category in disregarding the Government order in G.O.Ms.No.106, Special Welfare Department, dated 17.01.1986 has not been given the post of cook in the welfare hostels run by the respondent namely, the District Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare Department. Therefore, all these writ petitions seeking for a direction to the respondents to appoint them from the priority list for which their names find place and also to conduct interview and fill up posts in terms of the said Government order. 2.The case of the petitioners claimed in the writ petitions can be summarized in the following table: Sl. Name Educational Em...
Tag this Judgment!S.Maharaja Vs. the Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
This Habeas Corpus petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent, dated 2.8.2011, made in proceedings No.4/BDFGISSV/2011, and quash the same, and to produce the detenu, namely, E.Kombaiah, Son of Esakki Thevar, aged about 40 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, under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, 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 18.7.2011, under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act, in his proceedings No.4/BDFGISSV/2011, dated 2.8.2011, directing his detention, in...
Tag this Judgment!M.Nagarajan Vs. V.M.Nagammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
Mother-in-law has filed the suit against the son-in-law, for a judgment and decree, to declare that she is the only heir of her daughter Muniyendra. Upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence let in by both parties, by judgment and decree in O.S.No.700/2000, the learned Principal District Munsif, Gudiyatham, granted a decree, as prayed for. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant/son-in-law preferred an appeal in A.S.No.7 of 2004, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Gudiyatham. The lower appellate Court has confirmed the decision, stated supra. Assailing the concurrent judgments and decrees, the defendant has preferred this second appeal. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are addressed as per their litigative status in the lower Court. 3. The detailed pleadings are as follows:- According to the plaintiff, her daughter Muniyendra was employed as a Typist in Excise department in the office of the Tahsildar, at Gudiyatham. Her husband/defendant murdered Muniyendra and he...
Tag this Judgment!P.Navaneetha Krishnan Vs. the Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
The petitioner is a life convict. He was the sole accused in S.C.No.309 of 1983 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Tirunelveli. By judgment dated 17.09.1984, according to him, he was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. An appeal preferred against the same in Crl.A.No.705 of 1984 was also dismissed by this Court by order dated 17.04.1989, and thus, the sentence of imprisonment for life, has been confirmed. 2.According to the petitioner, he has completed 14 years of actual imprisonment in connection with the said case. According to him, as per Rule 341(2) of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, his case should have been placed before the Advisory Board under the Rule, for the purpose of considering as to whether he would be entitled for remission, but the case was not placed before the Advisory Board by the third respondent. As a result, according to him, he has not been given remission, though similarly placed persons have been gran...
Tag this Judgment!R.Lalitha Bai Vs. the Secretary to Government and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
Heard Mr.G.Muthukrishanan, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr.M.Dig Vijaya Pandian, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and Ms.J.Anandavalli, learned counsel for respondents 6 and 7. 2. Challenging the charge memo issued by the Chief Educational Officer, 4th respondent herein in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.8526/A2/2006 dated 07.12.2006; subsequent proceedings of the Joint Director, the 3rd respondent herein vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.045113/W3/E3/2007 dated 02.11.2007; subsequent and consequential order passed by the Joint Director, the 3rd respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.045113/W3/E3/07 dated 31.12.2007 and the final order passed by the Director of School Education, the 2nd respondent herein vide his proceedings Na.Ka.No.04113/W3/E3/07, dated 06.03.2008 and seeking to quash the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 3. Facts of the case as put forth by the petitioner would run thus: 3.1. The petitioner is a Post Gra...
Tag this Judgment!S.Devaraj Vs. the Superintending Engineer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-23-2011
By consent of learned counsel appearing for both parties, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. Heard Mr.K.Seshadri, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.K.Rameshwar, learned standing counsel for TNEB appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.S.N.Kirubanandam, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 and 6. 3. This Writ Petition has been moved by the petitioner, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear respondents 1 to 4 from effecting name transfer and shifting of the service connection in L.T.Sc.No.184 (Agriculture) from S.F.No.313/1K of Dhidumal village and post 637 204, Paramathivelu Taluk, Namakkal District, to another Well situated in different survey number. 4. According to the petitioner, he is the co-owner of the Well situated in S.F.No.313/1K, Dhidumal village. While getting the agricultural service connection, the father of the petitioner and some of the co-owners who have interest in the Well in S.F.No.313/1K,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »