Chennai Court October 2012 Judgments

Shantha Medical Foundation a Registered Charitable Trust Represented b ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Certiorari to call for the records in Ref.Pdl.No.44576/C3/2011 dated 24.08.2012, on the file of The Regional Transport Officer, Villupuram, and quash the said order.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned proceedings of the second respondent, dated 24.8.2012, wherein it has been stated that the vehicle in question cannot be used by the E.S.College of Nursing without the necessary permit having been issued for the said purpose, as the permit had been granted only in favour of the petitioner. However, it is found that the second respondent has stated that it would be open to the E.S.College of Nursing to submit the necessary applications for the grant of permit, as per law. It had also been stated that it would be open to the said college to make the necessary application for the grant of a temporary permit, if found ne...

Derby Clothing Private Limited a Private Limited Company, Represented ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent in PAN No.AABCD4286H relating to the application made by the petitioner for stay of demand under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and quash the impugned order dated 20.2.2012 rejecting the stay petition and direct the second respondent to grant stay of demand relating to the assessment order for the assessment year 2009-10, pending disposal of the appeal before the second respondent.) 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice if this Court is pleased to set aside the the impugned order, dated 20.2.2012, passed by the first respondent, rejecting the request of the petitioner for stay of coll...

M/S. Upasana Finance Limited Vs. the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2012(7)MLJ782

(Prayer: Appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras 'B' Bench, dated 20.1.2006 in I.T.A.Nos. 1325/MDS/99 and 726/MDS/99 for assessment year 1996-97 and 1995-96 respectively.) ChitraVenkataraman, J. 1. The assessee is on appeals as against the orders of the Tribunal by raising the following question of law:- "1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in disallowing depreciation on the two boilers leased out by the appellant? 2. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in rejecting the claims of depreciation on boilers which were leased out in accordance with law?" 2. T.C.(A). No. 2349 of 2006 relates to assessment year 1996-97 and T.C.(A). No. 2350 of 2006 relates to assessment year 1995-96. The assessee herein is engaged in the business of financing, hire purchase and bill discounting business. In respect of its claim for depreciation, on the assets leased out to M/s. Khoday India Limited, the assessee su...

K. Govindarajan Vs. K. Subramanian

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2012(7)MLJ776

(This second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 26.10.2004 passed by the learned Additional District Judge cum Fast Track Court, No.II, Salem in A.S.No.73 of 2003 in confirming the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2003 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Sankari in O.S.No.105 of 2000.) This second appeal is focussed by the defendant animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 26.10.2004 passed by the learned Additional District Judge cum Fast Track Court, No.II, Salem in A.S.No.73 of 2003 in confirming the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2003 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Sankari in O.S.No.105 of 2000. 2. The parties, for convenience sake, are referred to here under according to their litigative status before the trial Court. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The long and short of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this second appeal would run thus: a] The respondent/plaintiff, filed the suit seeking the following reliefs: To pass a ...

L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd, Rep. by Its Branch Accounts Manager N ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: in W.P.No.23211 of 2012:Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the files of the First Respondent herein in AP.No.CST.10/2011 dated 31.07.2012, and quash the same, while directing the First respondent to entertain the appeal filed by the petitioner on 12.9.2011 and dispose the same on merits. Prayer in W.P.No.23212 of 2012:Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the files of the Second Respondent herein as per his return memo dated 17.8.2012 and quash the proceeding of the Second Respondent dated 17.08.2012 returning the application dated 17.8.2012 filed by the petitioner while directing the Second Respondent to rectify his assessment dated 20.01.2011 and deleting the turnover of Rs.42,12,14,264/- as prayed for by the petitioner in his application dated 17.08.2012.) COMMON ORDER W.P. No. 23211 of 2012 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appea...

Kailash Timber and Flywoods, Coimbatore Vs. Saritha and Another

Court: Chennai

(Prayer:- This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Judgement and Decree dated 21.4.2009 made in WC.No.105/2005 by the learned Labour Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Coimbatore. ) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Judgement and Decree dated 21.4.2009 made in WC.No.105/2005 by the learned Labour Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Coimbatore, whereby a sum of Rs.4,29,547/- as total compensation was awarded to the claimant/the 1st Respondent herein for the death of her husband Balakrishnan on 01.06.2005. 2. The facts are that the deceased was working under the Appellant Timber Depot as a wood cutter for the past seven years and his last drawn pay was Rs.175/- per day. He was working in the premises of the Appellant Timber Depot. On 1.6.2005 at about 9.30 a.m. to 10.30 a.m., when he switched on the electric board in order to start his work, he was electrocuted and sustained serious injuries. Immediately, he was taken to Abirami Hospital and then, to...

S. Sathia Chandran Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Secretary to G ...

Court: Chennai

(Writ Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in these circumstances stated therein and in the respective affidavits filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction, in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, directing the respondent to take immediate and urgent steps to prepare a Victim Compensation Scheme as mandated by Section 357-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure forthwith (in WP.No.17598/2012). 1. This writ petition as Public Interest Litigation has been filed seeking a direction upon the respondents to take steps and prepare a Victim Compensation Scheme as mandated by Section 357-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Notices were issued to the respondents and in compliance therewith, a counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent-State of Tamil Nadu, wherein it is stated that the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, in their letter dated 7.9.2010,...

icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited Vs. Muniammal and Others

Court: Chennai

(Prayer:- This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Judgement and Decree dated 29.09.2007 made in WC.No.411/2005 by the learned Deputy Labour Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Salem. ) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Judgement and Decree dated 29.09.2007 made in WC.No.411/2005 by the learned Deputy Labour Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Salem, whereby a sum of Rs.3,28,079/- was awarded to the claimants/the Respondents 1 to 4 herein. 2. The only question that arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the Insurer is liable to pay compensation under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, when the driver, who was on the wheels, died due to heart attack. 3. The claimants/the Respondents 1 to 4 filed the above said claim a claim petition before the Deputy Labour Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Salem claiming compensation on ground that the 1st claimant being the widow and the claimants 2 to 4 b...

Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. Rep. by Its Managing Direct ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2012(5)LLN771; 2012(7)MLJ761

(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 14887 of 2009, dated 22.3.2010.) Elipe Dharma Rao, J. 1. Whether acquiring higher qualification can be considered to be a relevant criteria for the purpose of grant of advance increments and applicability of doctrine of 'equal pay for equal work' are involved in this appeal which arises out of the order of the learned single Judge dated 23.3.2010 passed in W.P. No. 14887 of 2009 allowing the Writ Petition filed by the respondent herein. 2. From the materials, it is seen that the respondent herein, who was a B.L. Degree holder, joined in the appellant Corporation as an Assistant, promoted as Junior Manager and subsequently, as Assistant Manager in the year 2000. Later on, the post was re-designated as Deputy Manager in view of his obtaining Post Graduate Qualification in Law. Further, in appreciation of his acquisition of Post Graduate Qualification in Law, the a...

Karnan Vs. State by Inspector of Police Traffic Investigation Wing

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2012(4)MLJ(Crl)677

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. against the Judgment dated 20.09.2006 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2006 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions and Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act), Salem confirming the judgment dated 22.12.2005 passed in C.C. No. 3 of 2004 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Salem.) 1. The petitioner was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 279 and 304-A of IPC and on completion of trial, the trial court convicted him for the offences under Section 279 and 304-A of IPC and sentenced to pay fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under Section 279 of IPC, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Section 304-A of IPC with fine of Rs.3,000, failing which to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence impos...