Chennai Court April 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.
Udayakumar. Vs. State by Forest Ranger.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
1. This Crl.R.C. is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Vellore in Crl.A.No.208 of 2006, dated 29.1.2007, confirming the said conviction and sentence passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Vellore in C.C.No.97 of 2005, dated 11.10.2006.2. The case of the prosecution is as follows: The Forest Range Officer, Gudiyatham Circle, submitted Form in S.T.O.R.No.4 of 1997 against the petitioner/A2 before the Court of the Special Judicial Magistrate (Sandalwood cases), Tirupattur, under Section 21(d)(e)(f) and Section 36-A and E of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act read with Tamil Nadu S.P. Rule 3(1), charging that the petitioner/A2 and other accused were in possession of 214 Kg. of sandalwood worth Rs.89,238/- in Maruthi Van on 7.4.1997. After furnishing the copies of documents, the learned Special Magistrate has framed charges against the revision petitioner/A2 for the said offences and the revision petitioner/A2...
V. Sivakumar. Vs. the Inspector General of Registration and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
1. Both the writ appeals arise out of the orders dated 09.06.2010 made in WP Nos. 30398 and 30399 of 2008 passed by the learned single Judge and therefore they are disposed of by this common judgment.2.The facts relate to both the writ appeals are that originally, the property in dispute was owned by one Jawahar Mills Limited, hereinafter referred to as 'Mill'. The Mill availed loan facility with Indian Overseas Bank, Salem by mortgaging the property in question. In view of the default committed by the Mill in repayment of the loan amount, Indian Overseas Bank had initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as SARFAESI Act) by issuing notice under Section 13 (2) and possession of the property was also taken over by the bank. Thereafter, on 29.03.2004, the bank issued a publication in newspaper inviting tenders for sale of the property on 30.03.2005. In the tender called for...
Sanjay Gupta, and ors. Vs. the Corporation of Chennai, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
1. One of the reminiscences of the colonial past, still standing as an archaeological monument in the heart of Chennai, is the Victoria Public Hall, off Poonamallee High Road near Central Railway Station. History shows that in a public meeting of the inhabitants of Madras, convened by the Sheriff of Madras, at Pachayappa's Hall, it was resolved on 17.3.1882 to erect a town hall for the use and benefit of the public. For the said purpose, the public were invited to subscribe to a fund already opened with M/s.Arbuthnot & Co. (which itself later plunged into litigation). Several citizens of Madras contributed various amounts and an influential Committee of the citizens of Madras was constituted to carry out the project of construction of a Town Hall. The Committee held negotiations with the then Municipal Commissioners for the Town of Madras, as a result of which, the Corporation passed resolutions dated 21.2.1883, 3.9.1884 and 24.9.1885, allotting land of an extent of about 57 grounds on...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai Vs. M/S. Wipro Infrastructure ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
1. The issue in dispute is as to whether education cess is required to be paid once again after arriving at the aggregate value of Customs duty. 2. I have heard learned SDR and perused the records - none appears for the respondents in spite of notice. I find that the issue stands settled in favour of the respondents by the decision of the Tribunal Sarla Performance Fibers Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Vapi [2010 (253) E.L.T.203 (Tri.-Ahmd.)] which decision has been followed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. I, therefore, see no reason to interfere with the same and accordingly uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal....
Commissioner of Central Excise, Tiruchirappalli Vs. M/S. Tamil Nadu Ne ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
1. Heard both sides on the appeal of the Revenue against the extension of capital goods credit on “welding electrodes”. 2. I find that the issue stands decided by the Hon’ble Madras High Court (jurisdictional High Court) in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Tiruchirappalli Vs India Cements Ltd. [2009 (238) E.L.T.411 (Mad.)] which decision has been followed in the case of the same assessee in Final Order No.721/2010 dated 01.07.2010. Following the ratio of the above decision, I uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal....
Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., and Others Vs. S.Natarajan
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Salem, alleging deficiency against the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- which the complainant invest the equipment with interest at 12% p.a from the date of purchase of the equipment till date of realization, to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for loss incurred for taking of equipment, to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and cost. The District Forum, allowed the complaint against the opposite parties. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite parties, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum, Salem, dated 29.05.2008 in C.C.No.11/2007. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 17.3.2011, on the basis of .written arguments 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 complainant filed a compla...
Life Insurance Corporation of India, Rep. by Its Branch Manager and Ot ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
The Respondents as complainants filed a complaint before the District Forum, Dindigul, alleging deficiency against the opposite parties to pay Rs.50,000/- towards policy amount, to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and to pay costs. The District Forum, allowed the complaint against the opposite parties. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite parties, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum, Dindigul, dated 11.02.2008 in C.C.No.20/2006. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 17.3.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel on 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 MEMBER JUDICIAL 1. The opposite parties are the appellants. 2. The complainants filed a complaint against the opposite parties praying for directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.50,000/- towards the policy amount, to p...
Ex-sepoy Sasikumar K. Vs. Union of India Rep by Its Under Secretary an ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Apr-01-2011
(Order of the Tribunal made by Justice ACA Adityan) 1. The applicant has been boarded out from his Army service on medical ground on 05.12.2005 with permanent category EEE with 60% of disability. After exhausting all the available statutory remedies, he has approached this Tribunal for the relief of disability pension. 2. According to the applicant, he was enrolled in the Madras Regiment on 25.04.1997. While the applicant was on annual leave, he met with a motor accident on 05.07.2004 and he was admitted in CMC Hospital, Vellore, Government General Hospital, Vellore, and thereafter in Military Hospital. Finally, the applicant was discharged from service on 05.12.2005. The applicant had completed 8 years 7 months and 6 days of Army service. The representation made by the applicant to the 3rd respondent claiming disability pension was rejected on 14.12.2006. The first appeal preferred by the applicant to the 2nd respondent on 31.01.2007 was also rejected on 10.03.2008 and the second appe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›