Chennai Court June 2011 Judgments
Commissioner of Customs, TuticorIn Vs. Naguru FakrudIn and Others
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Jun-15-2011
1. At the outset, learned SDR fairly points out that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the present cases stand ousted by the First Proviso to Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 as the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in terms of Section 129A(1)(b) relates to goods imported as unaccompanied baggage. The prayer of the Revenue would be to file an application for revision before the revisionary authority. 2. In the light of the language of the proviso to Section 129A, these appeals are dismissed as not maintainable before the Tribunal and the papers are returned to the Revenue for presentation before the proper forum. All the stay applications also stand disposed of accordingly....
Tag this Judgment!S.P. Selvaraj Vs. the Divisional Manager, Ltd.
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2011
The appellant as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to pay Rs.7,50,000/-as compensation towards the damages caused to the complainant vehicle KA-01A-285 with interest at 24% per annum from the date of accident till realization, to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony in not settling the matter and to pay Rs.7,500/- towards the costs. The District Forum dismissed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.17.12.2007 in C.C.80/2003. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 27.05.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the either counsels and perused the documents, Written Argument of appellant as well as the order of the District Forum, this Commission made the following order: M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. 2. The complainant/appellant...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep. by Its Divisional Manager Vs. R. Aru ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2011
The 1st and 2nd respondents as complainants filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying for the direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.3,50,000/- towards the deficiency in service, pain and sufferings and mental agony incurred by the complainants as compensation. The District Forum allowed the complaint against 2nd and 3rd opposite parties, against the said order, this appeal is preferred by 3rd opposite party, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.10.02.2009 in C.C.385/2004. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 27.05.2011, 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 third opposite party is the appellant.2. The 1st and 2nd respondents, in this appeal are the complainants, being father and son. The first complainant is a Credit Card Holder of the first opposi...
Tag this Judgment!Dr.D.Balachandar, M.S., Ortho., M/S.Ellen Hospital Vs. Master Arunkuma ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2011
The 1st respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying for the direction to the opposite parties to refund the total amount of Rs.8,500/- incurred by the complainant for the treatment taken at 1st opposite partys hospital, to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation and to pay the cost. The District Forum allowed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred by 2nd opposite party, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.07.06.2007 in C.C.106/2005. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 25.05.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the either counsels and perused the documents, Written Argument of appellant as well as the order of the District Forum, this Commission made the following order: M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The second opposite party is the appellant. 2. Brief facts:- The minor complainant had a fall on 25.12.2004 at Gandhipuram 5th Street, in which, he sustained injuries inclu...
Tag this Judgment!R. Deepakgarg Vs. Nehru College of Aeronautics and Applied Sciences, R ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2011
The appellant as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the respondent/opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party for a sum of Rs.36,000/- to be paid to the complainant, to pay Rs.1 lakh as compensation with cost. The District Forum allowed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to enhance the order of the District Forum dt.28.05.2007 in C.C.34/2006. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 30.05.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the appellants counsel 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 complainant not satisfied by the order of the District Forum, though it favoured him, has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation. 2. Facts:- The complainant/appellant on seeing the advertisement of the opposite partys Institution, joined in the College for B.Tech.,[Aeronautics] course in J...
Tag this Judgment!The Manager Ashok Leyland Finance Ltd., Vs. M. Sathyamoorthy
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2011
The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to redeliver the Yamaha Vehicle in good condition, alongwith compensation of Rs.5000/- and cot of Rs.2000/-. 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.15.2.2008 in CC.No.79/2005. This petition coming before us for hearing finally 31.5.2011. Upon hearing the arguments of the appellant counsel on eitherside, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order in the open court: M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The opposite party is the appellant. 2. The respondent/complainant, approached the District Forum, seeking a direction against the opposite party, to redeliver the Yamaha motorcycle, with good condition, as well for the recovery of a sum of RS.5000/-, as ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr.S. Manimegalai, K.B. Hospital Vs. Boopathy
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2011
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 pay Rs.5 lakhs towards compensation for medical expenses, mental agony and stress and strain. 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.30.11.2007 in C.C.29/2006. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 25.05.2011, 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 opposite party having suffered an adverse order in the hands of the District Forum at Krishnagiri in COP.29/2006, challenges the same in this appeal. 2. The complainant had taken treatment from the opposite party, treating her as family doctor for many years. On 23.08.2004, she was admitted in the hosp...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd., and Another Vs. K.M. Balamurugan
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-2011
The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying for the direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.10500/- with 12% interest alongwith compensation of RS.2500/- and cost of Rs.2000/-. 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.09.09.2008 in CC.No.158/2007. This petition coming before us for hearing finally on 01.06.2011. Upon hearing the arguments of the counsel on both sides, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order: M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The opposite parties are the appellants. 2. The respondent/ complainant, who had owned a Nokia handset, which was insured with the 2nd opposite party, lost the same on 29.10.2005, while traveling in a town bus, for which he immediately lodged a complaint, before the Inspector of...
Tag this Judgment!The Branch Manager State Bank of India Vs. V.R. Duraisamy
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-2011
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 Rs.54,521/- towards the matured value, alongwith 15% interest, and compensation of Rs.1 lakh. The District Forum dismissed the complaint. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.25.3.2008 in OP.No.51/2006. This petition coming before us for hearing finally on 31.5.2011. Upon hearing the arguments of the counsels on both sides, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order: M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The challenge TO the order, in this appeal is dt.30.7.2009, wherein a direction has been given against the opposite party, to pay a sum of Rs.54,521/-, with interest thereon at 12% p.a., from 21.4.2008, alongwith compensation of RS.15000/- + Rs.1000/- as cost, based upon deficiency in...
Tag this Judgment!M. LenIn (Ex Sepoy 2604698 H) Vs. Union of India â Represented by ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Jun-13-2011
(Order of the Tribunal made by Justice ACA Adityan) 1. Challenging the impugned order of the first respondent dated 20.03.2009, the applicant, who has been discharged under Army Rule 13(3)III(v), has come forward with this application. 2. According to the applicant, the applicant was recruited as Sepoy under the respondents and he was a National Level Hockey player, and he was promoted to the entry rank of Sepoy on 3rd March 2000. He was posted in the rank of Sepoy to 25 Madras of the Madras Regimental Centre (MRC) and the applicant was attached to MRC Sports Company with effect from 4th August 2000 during his active military service period. On 18th April 2002, while playing Hockey, the applicant tumbled down suddenly on developing giddiness and he was given first aid and was allowed to remain in rest for two days. Thereafter, on 22nd April 2002, there was a discussion in Hockey Team Members at 20.20 hours at Sports Company, MRC, and at that time also the applicant had developed the sa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »