Chennai Court November 2012 Judgments

M. Sekar Vs. the Tamil Nadu State Markering Corporation Ltd., (Tasmac) ...

Court: Chennai

(Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for issue of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to forthwith reinstate the petitioner in service as a shop Supervisor in the TASMAC Shop by considering and passing orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 26.8.2011.) Though in this writ petition, the prayer of the petitioner is innocuous, namely, to direct the respondent to consider his representation dated 26.8.2011, the representation itself does not inspire confidence. 2. In the representation, a copy of which is found at page No.5 of the typed set, the petitioner has stated that he was appointed on 2.12.2003 as a Shop-Supervisor on a part time temporary contract basis in Shop No.1583, Thadagam Main Road, Coimbatore. It is further stated that due to family circumstances, he could not attend the work and now, he demanded employment as shop-supervisor. Even in the affidavit it is not disclosed as to from which date he stopped work; the grounds on...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Dawood Sons

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: APPEALs under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench dated 25.08.2006 in ITA.No.2602/Mds/2004 and dated 31.08.2006 in ITA.No.3246/Mds/04.) P.P.S. JANARTHANA RAJA, J. 1. The Revenue is on appeal as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench dated 25.08.2006 in ITA.No.2602/Mds/2004 and dated 31.08.2006 in ITA.No.3246/Mds/04. raising the following questions of law:- "1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee's status cannot be changed from Association of persons to firm under Section 143(1) when in fact the assessee had filed its return inducating its status as Firm in Form 3CD? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in going into the question of the assessee's status, when the assessee had not filed an appeal raising that dispute before the Tribunal...

The United India Insurance Co. Limited, Nilgiris Vs. Arukkani and Othe ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer:- This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Judgement and Decree dated 8.9.2010 made in MCOP.No.211/2008 by the learned Additional District Judge, FTC II, MACT, Gobichettipalayam.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Co. Limited, Nilgiris against the Judgement and Decree dated 8.9.2010 made in MCOP.No.211/2008 by the learned Additional District Judge, FTC II, MACT, Gobichettipalayam. 2. The short question that arises for consideration in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is that when it has been proved that the driver of the offending vehicle had no licence to drive the heavy motor vehicle and had licence to only drive light motor vehicle, whether the Insurance Company can claim exoneration from its liability on the ground that the driver had no valid driving licence at the time of the accident. 3. The facts of the case are that on 2.6.2006, the deceased Sasi @ Sasikumar, son of the claimant/the 1st Respondent herein was traveling in ...

R. Betsy Vinolia Vs. Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Rep by It ...

Court: Chennai

(This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to consider the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Professor of Law – Intellectual Property Rights by getting clarification from the 2nd respondent as to LLM Degree course. ) The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the first respondent Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, to consider her appointment to the post of Assistant Professor of law (Intellectual Property Rights), by getting clarification from the second respondent University Grants Commission (for short UGC) as to the LLM Degree course undergone by her. 2. When the writ petition came up on 14.08.2012, this court directed notice to be served on the Standing Counsel for the respondents and an interim injunction was granted restraining the University from making any appointment to the post of Assistant Professor of Law...

S. Velmurugan and Another Vs. the District Collector, Vellore District ...

Court: Chennai

(Both writ petitions are preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the entire records of the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in A2 (Pa.Vae) 377/12 dated 29.6.2012 and the consequential order passed in Na.Ka.A3.381/12, dated 30.6.2012 and quash the same. ) COMMON ORDER: These two writ petitions were filed by the two individuals who are working as Assistants in the Taluk Office at Arcot as well as in the District Revenue Office at Vellore respectively. By an order dated 29.6.2012, their names were removed from the eligible list of Assistants in the panel for the year 2012 and promotions given to them were cancelled by the District Revenue Officer, Vellore, i.e., the third respondent. It was informed that the petitioners were not qualified in terms of Rule 30(c) of the Special Rules relating to the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service as they have not undergone training as Junior Assistant for one year and they...

Rajkumar Vs. State Rep. By: Inspector of Police Muthapudupet Police St ...

Court: Chennai

(Criminal appeal preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur, made in S.C.No.110 of 2009 dated 11.8.2010.) C. NAGAPPAN, J. The appellant Rajkumar is the sole accused in Sessions Case No.110/2009, on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur and he has preferred this appeal challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on him by judgment dated 11.8.2010, in the case. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment, the appellant will be referred to as accused. 2. Charges under Sections 364 and 302 IPC were framed against the accused. Learned Principal Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of both the charges, convicted him as per the charges and sentenced him: a) to undergo 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo 1 year Rigorous Imprisonment, for the charge under Section 364 IPC and b) to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,0...

Suresh Auto Finance Vs. T. Rajendran

Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

(The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying for a direction to the opposite party to give No due Certificate in respect of vehicle and to refund the excess amount of Rs.10,360/- and to pay Rs.75,000/- as compensation for mental agony and to pay Rs.5000/- as costs. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the appellant/opposite party praying to set aside the order of the District Forum in CC.423/2005 dated 9.11.2009. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 06.11.2012. Upon hearing the arguments of the counsel for the appellant, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this Commission made the following order:) A.K.ANNAMALAI, MEMBER The opposite party is the appellant. The complainant purchased two wheeler from the opposite party on hire purchase basis on 29.08.2002 availing finance of Rs.1,52,240/- repayable in...

R. Chandrakesan Vs. Church of South India Trust Association, Rep. by I ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2013(1)MWN(Civil)251; 2013(2)MLJ259

(Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree, dated 30.07.1997, made in A.S.No.26 of 1997 on the file of the District Judge, Nilgiris, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 22.02.1996 made in O.S.No.575 of 1994 on the file of the District Munsif, Udhagamandalam.) The defendant, allegedly a trespasser, seeking mercy from the plaintiff, but complaining of acquiescence, capable of squatting on the property for more than twenty-five years, by claiming adverse possession, has filed this second appeal. 2. The defendant is the appellant. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.575 of 1994 seeking recovery of possession, mesne profits (for the period from 01.12.1991 to 30.11.1994, amounting to Rs.5,475/- with 12% interest) and damages at the rate of Rs.10/- per day for the subsequent period. The said suit was decreed. The appeal preferred by the defendant was dismissed with costs. As against the judgment and decree of the first appellate...

The Chairman, Tantransco, Chennai Vs. the District Collector, Thiruval ...

Court: Chennai

(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to R.C.No.17866/2010/M2, dated 18.5.2012, quash the same and consequently direct the petitioner to erect the Tower along the approved alignment.) 1. This writ petition is filed by the then TNEB and now TANTRANSCO (Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporation) challenging the order of the first respondent dated 18.5.2012 giving direction to the petitioner to erect the Tower and realign the power transmission lines along the approved alignment. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the TANTRANSCO sanctioned a scheme of erection of 400 KV Multi Circuit Transmission Line from North Chennai Thermal Power Station (Stage-II) to Alamathy 400 KV SS for a length of about 34 kms for power evacuation to meet out the power crisis existing in the State of Tamil Nadu vide Board Proceedings No.(Permanent) B.P.(FB) No.80, dated 11.8.2...

Water Bodies and Environment Protection Welfare Sangam, Selaiyur, Rep. ...

Court: Chennai

(PRAYER: Memorandum of Grounds of Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of a learned single Judge of this Court dated 3.8.2012 passed in Writ Petition No.29217 of 2010. The Hon’ble the Chief Justice: This writ appeal has been filed against the order passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.29217 of 2010. 2. The appellant-Association filed the writ petition for a direction to forbear the respondents from constructing a pumping station in the play ground of Selaiyur Municipal Higher Secondary School comprised in S. Nos.84/B1 and 84/B3 of Selaiyur Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District on the ground that the decision of the authorities to construct a pumping station in an area earmarked as park and playground will affect the right of the children to have a proper playground, as the land in which the pumping station was proposed would encroach upon the school’s land, thus eating into the space meant for the playgr...