Chennai Court November 2012 Judgments

N. Babu Petitioner Vs. S. Shanmugam and Others

Court: Chennai

(Civil Revision Petition to strike off the plaint in O.S.No.97 of 2012 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Villupuram.) Second defendant is the revision petitioner. He filed the revision to strike off the plaint in O.S.No.97 of 2012 filed by the first respondent herein for injunction. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the subject matter of the suit in O.S.No.97 of 2012 originally belonged to the third defendant/third respondent herein. The third defendant/third respondent herein agreed to sell the property to the revision petitioner, who is the second defendant in O.S.No.97 of 2012 and also executed the sale deed on 2.1.1993 after receiving consideration and did not turn up for registration. Therefore, the revision petitioner applied to the Registrar for compulsory registration and after enquiry, the sale deed was directed to be registered by order dated 1.12.1994. Thus, the revision petitioner became the owner of the property and he a...

M.Suresh Kumar Vs. Union of India Rep. by Its Secretary and Others

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Quo Warranto calling for the records relating to the appointment of the sixth respondent as Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu and Head of Police by the fifth respondent made in G.O.2(D)No.375, Home (SC) Department dated 05.11.2012 passed by the fifth respondent and the consequential amendment issued in G.O.Ms.No.869, Home (SC) Department dated 12.11.2012 by the fifth respondent through which impliedly extended the period of service of the sixth respondent for another two years with effect from 01.12.2012 and quash the same.) ORDER: (V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN,J.) 1. The petitioner, who is a practising Advocate and who claims to be carrying on social activities for the welfare of the public at large, has come up with the above writ petition seeking issue of a writ of Quo Warranto questioning the authority of the sixth respondent to hold the office of the Director General of Police in Tamil Nadu. 2. We hav...

P. Venkataraman Vs. the Government of Tamilnadu, Rep. by Its Secretary ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Writ petitionfiled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records of the Impugned Proceedings on the file of the 1st Respondent - vide Government letter No.16427/HW2/2009 Highways & Minor Ports (HW2) Department dated 22.4.2010, consequently the Notification under section 15(1) of the Tamilnadu Highways Act - vide Proceedings of the 5th Respondent in Na.Ka.No.309/2009/A1 dated 12.4.2010 and to quash the same and direct the Respondents to realign the widening of the road over the Patta lands of the Petitioner situated at Survey Nos.115 (19 cents) and 116 (39 cents) at Village No.38, Vadaperumbakkam Village, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District, in consonance with the provisions of the Section 8 of the Tamilnadu Highways Act, 2001 and Rules 3,4 and 5 of the Tamilnadu Highways Rules 2003. Contempt Petitionfiled under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondents for the contempt committed by...

Eta General Private Limited, Rep. by Its Deputy General Manager, (Comm ...

Court: Chennai

(Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent in Order-in-Original No.18452/2012, dated 07.03.2012 in F.No.S4/06/2001-Gr.5A & 5B and job No.19414/2012-Gr.5A and to quash the same and direct the respondents to remove the Alert in the system.) This writ petition has been filed challenging the Order-in-Original No.18452/2012, dated 07.03.2012. At the first instance, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs made a demand of Rs.4,91,000/- in respect of three bills of entry with interest on failure to produce the B.15 Registration Certificate issued to the supplier of the goods namely switches, which were cleared provisionally. 2. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai, after hearing the appeal, set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the o...

The National Insurance Company Ltd., Divisional Office Ii, Coimbatore ...

Court: Chennai

(APPEAL under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award dated 22.4.2008 made in M.C.O.P.No.186 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Court), Pollachi.) CHITRA VENKATARAMAN, J. Insurance Company is on appeal as against the order of the Tribunal, granting a compensation of Rs.14,83,000/-. 2. The accident occurred on 23.12.2005. The claimants are the wife, minor children and parents of the deceased Ganesan. Admittedly, as on the date of death, he was 40 years and five months old. The Tribunal pointed out that while the deceased was driving a two wheeler to Pollachi Main Road, the van, insured with the appellant herein, driven in a rash and negligent manner, caused the accident. The victim sustained injuries and died later. Based on the evidence of PW2 - an eyewitness, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the van driver was responsible for causing the accident. 3. As regards the claim of compensation, the claimants showed that the decease...

P.A. Mangalam Vs. the Chief Executive Officer, Chennai and Another

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to forbear the respondents, their men, agents, servants or subordinates or anybody else acting on their behalf from in any way demolishing the petitioner's existing building and committing any act of waste in No.9, G.S.T. Road, St. Thomas Mount, Chennai 16.) 1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking to forbear the respondents, their men, agents, servants or subordinates or anybody else acting on their behalf from in any way demolishing the petitioner's existing building and committing any act of waste in No.9, G.S.T. Road, St. Thomas Mount, Chennai 16. 2. Facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are detailed hereunder: 2.1. The land in question was originally purchased by the petitioner and her husband in the names of the petitioner, her husband and his brother vide a registered Sale Deed dated 24.10.1973 from Mr.Jeevan Chand Sowcar, son of Mr.Sookula...

K.A. Suruma Vs. C.K. Richard Antony @ Jose C Antony

Court: Chennai

(Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent for having willfully violated the order dated 12.12.2007 passed in Crl.O.P.No.32730 of 2007 pursuant to the affidavit of undertaking dated 12.12.2007 given by the respondent.) The contempt petition arose out of the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.32730 of 2007 dated 12.12.2007. By the aforesaid order, this Court granted anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner in the OP and the respondent in the contempt. Anticipatory Bail was granted on usual terms of petitioner executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties and also to appear before the investigation officer every day for one week and thereafter as and when required for interrogation after his release on bail. 2. During the course of the order, in paragraphs 5 and 6, this Court recorded as follows:- "5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner already had executed a deed for cancellation of the ...

M/S. Sri Kanaka Durga Castings (P) Ltd, Pondicherry Rep by Managing Di ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the 1st respondent in connection with the impugned order No.447/ED/EE-II/JE-Tech/JE-Tech/F-SKDC/2012-13 dated 30.04.2012 and compounded in Letter No.1385/ED/EE-II/JE/F-SKDC/2012-13 dated 26.06.2012, quash the same.) 1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to quash the impugned order of the 1st respondent made in No.447/ED/EE-II/JE-Tech/JE/F-SKDC/2012-13, dated 30.04.2012 and compounded in Letter No.1385/ED/EE-II/JE/F-SKDC/2012-13 dated 26.06.2012. 2. Facts of the case as put forth in the affidavit would run thus: (i) The petitioner Company is a Private Limited Company registered with the Registrar of Companies, Puducherry and it is also registered as a small scale industry with District Industrial Centre, Puducherry. It is into the business of manufacturing ingots, billets and alloy steel castings. The Consumer service was released on 03...

Akilandeswari Vidyalaya, Rep. by Its Correspondent and Another Vs. the ...

Court: Chennai

R. BANUMATHI, J. 1. Main writ petitions - W.P.Nos.22391 and 22392, along with batch of writ petitions, were disposed of by this Court by judgment dated 21.09.2012, to which one of us (R.Banumathi,J.) was a member, holding that the provisions of Tamil Nadu Schools (Regulation and Collection of Fee) Act, 2009 are applicable to CBSE and ICSE Schools and all the writ petitions were dismissed. 2. The writ petitioners have filed these petitions seeking clarification that the 1st respondent shall take into consideration the guidelines given by this Court in W.P.No.16023 of 2011 etc., dated 3.5.2012 along with the CBSE norms. It is the contention of the writ petitioner that earlier they have filed objection before the School Fee Determination Committee mainly challenging the applicability of the Act to CBSE Schools and not on merits. In view of the dismissal of the writ petitions, now the writ petitioners pray that opportunity be given to them to go before the Committee to put forth their case...

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Subbarayalu and Others

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2013(1)TNMAC115

(Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 27.08.2008 made in M.C.O.P.No.11 of 2007 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) at Udumalpet.) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellant Insurance Company against the judgment and decree dated 27.08.2008 made in M.C.O.P.No.11 of 2007 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) at Udumalpet. 2. The background facts in a nutshell are as under:- The deceased Manikandan met with motor traffic accident on 31.10.2006 at 12 noon. The said deceased was riding his motor cycle Hero Honda on Pollachi Main Road. At that time, a mini bus driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the deceased. He died on the spot. The claimants are father, mother and brother of the deceased. They claimed compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-. On pleadings, the Tribunal dealt with the following issue:- Whether the claimants are entitled...