Chennai Court January 2012 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. Sivasubramanian Vs. Salathu, Arul Thirumana Mandapam and Another
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jan-06-2012
The appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 1.12.2011, upon hearing the arguments of 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 JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. 2. Complainant filed a complaint against the opposite parties claiming direction for payment of Rs.1,00,000/- each as compensation for the loss caused and for costs. 3. Complainant engaged 1st opposite party to erect bore well in his house site at Sirukulathur village on 14.5.2008 by paying Rs.20,000/- to the 1st opposite party for which he has purchased bore well pipes from the 2nd opposite party for Rs.27,100/- and subsequently fixed submersible motor purchased from Puthucheri on 27.5.2008 and the bore well was functioning from the month of June 2008 and in November 2008 all of a sudden he found that pipes inserted in the bore well got cracked and the bore well...
The Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Panpoli Branch, Panpoli Vs. ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jan-06-2012
(The appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 1.12.2011, upon hearing the arguments of respondents 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 JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. Opposite party is the appellant. 2. Complainant filed a complaint against the opposite party claiming direction for payment of Rs.2,00,000/- towards mental agony, harassment and for medical expenses and for the costs due to deficiency of service by the opposite party. 3. The complainant obtained loan by hypothecating his auto TN 76-C-3277 in the year 2007 for which he has deposited the title deeds of his house property and executed mortgage deed on 7.5.07 and thereafter on discharging of the loan the opposite party sent no objection letter to the RTO for cancellation of hypothecation endorsement and when the complainant requested for the documents deposited along with the discharge of mortgage deed, ...
T. Prabakaran Vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep. by It ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jan-06-2012
(The Appellant as Complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party, praying for a direction to refund Rs.95000/- towards eligible cost of repair of the vehicle, alongwith compensation of Rs.1 lakh and cost. 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.10.12.2009 in CC.No.60/2009. This petition coming before us for hearing finally on 30.12.2011. Upon hearing the arguments of the counsel on both sides, perusing the material papers on record, lower court records, as well as the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order:) M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. The complainant is the appellant. 2. The complainant being the owner of a car bearing Regn. No.TN38 Y4489, Tata Indica, insured the same with the opposite party, for the period covering 7.11.2006 to 6.11.2007 under Policy No.3001/050633376/00B00. 3. On 12.9.2007, he ha...
Tharmar Vs. the State of Tamilnadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
This habeas corpus petition is filed by the husband of the detenue by name Tharmar Samuthiram, a resident of Pudukkottai District. The detenue was detained under Section 3(1)(i) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (Central Act 52 of 1974) and confined in Special Prison for Women, Tiruchirapalli pursuant to the order of detention passed in G.O.No.SR.I/369-5/2011 dated 12.7.2011. The said Government Order was subsequently amended by order dated 15.7.2011 substituting the name of the Central Prison, Tiruchirapalli, to Special Prison for Women, Tiruchirapalli. 2. The case of the petitioner is that on 25.5.2011 the detenue came from Colombo by Jet Flight No.SG 002 and arrived at Anna International Airport, Chennai. The Immigration Officers attached to the Airport Customs Department intercepted the detenue as if she brought gold and attempted to smuggle the same without making declaration. The Officers examined the detenue and recovered 10...
G.Varadharajulu Naidu Vs. the State of Tamilnadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
Heard the arguments of Mr.A.R.Suresh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.Navaneethakrishnan, learned Advocate General appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu. 2. In these Writ Petitions, the petitioners have challenged a circular issued by the State Government dated 10.01.2011 and after setting aside the same, they want the respondents to consider their case by sending their names for Certificate Verification and selection to the post of Graduate Teacher in any of the School run by the State. 3. The communication, which is referred to by the petitioners is issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Social Welfare Department and addressed to the Teachers Recruitment Board stating that the persons who are working in the Noon Meal Centres run by the Social Welfare Department, are in receipt of educational qualification, i.e., a basic degree as well as Degree in Education, they can be considered for writing the Special Examination for recruitment to the post of Graduate Te...
The Management Vs. the Joint Commissioner of Labour and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
Both the Writ Petitions were filed by the State owned Transport Corporation having its headquarters at Dharmapuri. In the 1st Writ Petition, the challenge is to the order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation), Chennai made in Approval Petition No.252 of 2003 dated 16.2.2006. By the said impugned order, the said authority refused to grant approval for dismissing the contestant 2nd respondent (J.Sengolan) from the service of the Corporation. That Writ Petition was admitted on 13.3.2007. Pending the Writ Petition, an interim stay was granted. Subsequently, the matter was referred for resolution of the dispute by the Lock Adalat and the matter, as could not be resolved, came back from the Lok Adalat with an endorsement to that effect and thus taken up for final hearing. 2. After perusing the records, it is found that the same petitioner has filed another Writ Petition earlier being W.P.No.44559 of 2006 challenging the award made by the Labour Court, Salem in I.D.No.77 o...
A.T.S.V.S Siddha Medical College and Hospital and anr. Vs. the Secreta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
As the common questions of law and facts involved in these writ petitions, hence, these writ petitions are disposed of by a common order. For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from WP.No. 20232 of 2011. 2. The petitioner in WP.No. 20232 of 201, a Ayurveda College, has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the order passed by the Government of India, exercising statutory powers vested under the Indian Medicine Central Council (IMCC) Act, 1970, refusing to grant permission under section 13C of the said Act, for admission of the students for the session of 2011-2012. 3. The petitioner college is run by AVR Educational foundation managed in association with RVS Educational Trust Sulur, Coimbatore. The institution has been founded for the promotion of Ayurvedic Medicine. The course of BAMS was started by the institution in the year 1978 and is recognised by CCIM in 1986. 4. The College is also affili...
K.Pazhani Vs. the Presiding Officer and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition challenging the award passed by the first respondent Labour Court, Cuddalore in I.D.No.112 of 1998 dated 26.3.2007. 2. By the impugned award, the Labour Court held that the petitioner being a Secretary of the second respondent co-operative society, which is a primary agricultural cooperative bank at Parvathipuram, Vadalur Post is not a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act and therefore the dispute raised by him under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act is not maintainable. 3. It is seen from the records that the petitioner was given a suspension order of 25.7.1997. Subsequently after his explanation, a charge memo dated 25.11.1997 was given to him. The President of the Board of Directors took appropriate action including conducting domestic enquiry. The Domestic Enquiry Officer gave a report dated 15.2.1998 holding that the petitioner guilty of the misconduct. On the basis of the report, a ...
S.Sundaramurthy Vs. Metropolitan Transport Corporation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.720 of 2011 has been filed by the appellant/claimant challenging the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter called as the “Tribunal”) in M.C.O.P.No.721 of 2006 on the ground of inadequacy of compensation. 2. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3366 of 2001 has been filed by the Appellant-Transport Corporation challenging the order passed by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.721 of 2006 contending that the amount of compensation awarded is excessive and that the findings on negligence is incorrect. 3. In both the cases, common question of fact and law arises for consideration, and hence the common Judgment is pronounced. 4. Brief facts are that the Appellant/claimant-S.Sundaramurthy, aged about 50 years is employed as Clerk in Arulmigu Parthasarathy Temple, Triplicane and was earning a sum of Rs.7,500/- per month. On 30.01.2006, when the appellant/claimant tried to board the bus, the driver took the bus in a rash and negligent manner...
United India Insurance Company Vs. B.Padmavathy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
Challenge in this appeal is the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court No.IV, Chennai in M.C.O.P.NO.2791 of 2001 awarding compensation of Rs.35,12,000/- for the death of a Mathematics teacher Late R.Ravi in road traffic accident on 08.11.2000. 2. On 8.11.2000, at 5.30 p.m at Poonamallee High Road in Maduravoil opposite to Petrol Bunk run by a Cooperative Society, the deceased was proceeding in his motor cycle T.V.S.Suzuki bearing Regn.No.TN-20A 350 with his colleague Krishnamurthy [PW3] as a pillion rider. The Motor cycle was proceeding from east to west. At that time, light goods vehicle bearing Regn.No.KA-01 - 8506 came in the opposite direction i.e., west to east in Poonamallee High Road and came to the southern side of the road and hit against the motorcycle. Due to the accident, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and he was immediately taken to Government General Hospital, Chennai, where he was declared dead....
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »