Chennai Court March 2011 Judgments
Mr.R.Krishnamurthy and anr. Vs. the Corporation of Chennai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2011
O R D E R1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to receive, consider and accord Planning Permission for the proposed constitutions to be put up in the land situated at Building Block No.80, Indra Colony, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 083 in the land measuring one ground and 2356 square feet and comprised in T.S.No.2 part, Block No.71 of No.111, Kodambakkam Village, Mambalam-Guindy Taluk, Chennai District and situated within the Registration District of Central Chennai and Sub- Registration District of Ashok Nagar in accordance with law and without insisting upon No Objection Certificate from the third respondent or any other Authorities concerned expeditiously.2. Mr.V.Bharathidasan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the first respondent; Mr.C.Kathiravan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the second respondent and Mr.A.Vijayakumar, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the third respondent. By consent, the writ pet...
Tag this Judgment!The Special Officer Vs. P. Subramaniam and Others
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2011
(Prayer: The Respondents as complainants filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to repay the amount of Rs.21,343/- due on fixed deposits along with interest at 12.5% per annum from the date of complaint till date of payment, to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and torture and to pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost. The District Forum partly allowed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.11.07.2008 in C.C.138/2008. The Respondents as complainants filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to repay the amount of Rs.5,46,452.20 due on fixed deposits along with interest at 12.5% per annum from the date of complaint till date of payment, to pay Rs.4,25,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and torture and to pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost. T...
Tag this Judgment!Mr.S.Selvam Vs. the President
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
O R D E R1. Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to execute and register a deed of discharge/cancellation of the mortgage deed dated 14.2.2000 registered on 16.2.2000 as document No.457/2000 in the Office of the Sub Registrar, Velachery insofar as the petitioner's land in Plot No.147 comprised in Survey Nos.89/3B and 90/2B in Srinivasa Layout, Puzhuthivakkam Village.2. Mr.S.Shivashanmugam, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondent.3. Petitioner claims to be the owner of the property in Puzhuthivakkam Village in Survey Nos.89/3B and 90/2B and states that he has purchased a property under sale deed dated 26.10.1988 as document No.3910/88 from one Mr.K.Venkatapathy. When he sought approval from the local authorities for construction of building and when he applied for an encumbrance certificate, it came to light that the property was mortgaged on 14.2.2000 by one Mr.Ravi for and on behalf of his minor son Sivashankaran in ...
Tag this Judgment!A.Sarangan Vs. Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
O R D E R1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing respondents to consider the applications of the petitioner dated 6.1.2011 in Nos.10274 and 10220 for giving water connection and sewerage connections to the house of the petitioner in the light of the notice dated 25.2.2011 given by counsel to the second and the third respondents.2. Mr.V.Manoharan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.3. Petitioner seeks water and sewerage connection to his house and has given representation dated 18.2.2011 followed by a legal notice dated 25.2.2011/8.3.20911. It is stated that the respondents have not taken any action so far.4. Mr.V.Manoharan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents states that the authority will consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law.5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents, the respondents are...
Tag this Judgment!S.Thilagavathi Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
O R D E R1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the explanation offered by the petitioner dated 22.4.2009 and pass orders afresh pertaining to the proceedings of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.0718/2009/PA3 dated 16.10.2009 together with the Notification Published in the Namakkal District Gazette in issue No.6 dated 21.11.2009 in Roc.No.0718/09 (PA-3) dated 16.10.2009 as directed by this Court in W.P.No.26302 of 2009 on 15.6.2010 within a stipulated time.2. Mr.S.Shivashanmugam, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondents.3. The overanxious, petitioner, the President of Chikkanaickenpalayam Panchayat, has filed the second writ petition for a direction to the first respondent to pass final orders in the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act.4. It will be pertinent to point out that earlier this Court in W.P.No.26302 of 2009 on 15.6.2010 ...
Tag this Judgment!Fr.Sebastian Fernancies Vs. the District Forest Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
O R D E R1. The prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the order passed by the first respondent dated 21.06.2001 and to direct the first respondent to refund the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- accepted by way of composition of the offence, together with interest.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow campus:-The petitioner belongs to the society of Jesuits and he was the manager of St.Joseph Estate, measuring about 150 acres in Thorapally, Gudalur, Nilgiris District. On 20.06.2001 at about 5.00p.m. a team of forest officials came into the petitioner's residence and seized two guns and an air gun. According to the petitioner, two guns were licenced and those guns held by him as retainer under order dated 27.11.1990 and the licence is in the name of President and Provincial of Karnataka Jesuit Province, Bangalore. It is stated that the forest officials took the petitioner in their jeep, to the office of the first respondent and he was detain...
Tag this Judgment!The Director, Bhagyalakshmi Travels and Another Vs. M. Sahul Hameed
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
(Prayer: The respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to pay a total sum of Rs.1 lakh as compensation. The District Forum allowed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.26.10.2007 in C.C.40/2004. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 08.03.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the appellant counsel and perused the documents, Written Submission as well as the order of the District Forum, this commission made the following order:) M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The unsuccessful opposite parties are the appellants. 2. The complainant being a wholesale Merchant used to purchase Lungies, at Chennai for business. On 17.10.2003, he had purchased lungies for a sum of Rs.50,500/- from Mohammed Ismail Company, which were sent through the first opposite party transport in two bundles, for which, the...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Sivakani Subash Vs. S. Sivaraj
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
(Prayer: The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Coimbatore alleging deficiency against the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,25,000/- towards the cost of 2nd operation, to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards mental agony and guish and humiliation, to pay interest at the rate of 24% on 1,25,000/- from 16.5.05 to till date of realization and to pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost. The District Forum, allowed the complaint against the opposite party. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum, Coimbatore, dated 3.12.07 in C.C.No.197/2006. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 9.3.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel on both side, 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 MEMBER JUDICIAL 1. The opposite party is the appellant. 2. The complainant ...
Tag this Judgment!The Assistant General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Apex Co-op. Bank Ltd. ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
(Prayer: The 1st Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Chennai (North) alleging deficiency against the opposite parties to pay Rs.34,216/- the cheque amount with interest @ 24% from 24.1.06 onwards till realization, to pay Rs.50,000/- as damages for deficiency of service, to pay Rs.50,000/- for the resultant mental agony and pain and to pay Rs.6,500/- as cost of this complaint. The District Forum, allowed the complaint against the opposite parties. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the 1st opposite party, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum, Chennai(North), dated 25.08.08 in C.C.No.133/2006. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 24.02.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel on both side, 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 MEMBER JUDICIAL 1. The 1st opposite party is the app...
Tag this Judgment!Hdfc Bank Ltd., Rep. by Manager, Authorized Signatory, Chennai Vs. S. ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
(Prayer: The respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the appellant/opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to handover the original Registration Certificate of two wheeler vehicle, Yamaha Libero model bearing R.C. No.TN-59-T-3287, to pay Rs.15,000/- as compensation fro mental agony suffered by the complainant, to pay Rs.10,000/- for deficiency in service and to pay the cost. The District Forum allowed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.17.08.2007 in C.C.84/2007. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 09.03.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the either counsels and perused the documents, as well as the order of the District Forum, this Commission made the following order:) M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The unsuccessful opposite party in C.C.84/2007 on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Madurai, is the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »