Chennai Court February 2012 Judgments
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd Vs. Ms Subhiksha Trading Services.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
Petition filed under Sections 433(e) & (f) r/w 434 (i) (a) and 439(1)(b) and 237 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking to wind up the Respondent Company namely M/s Subhiksha Trading Services Limited uner the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.ORDER1. This Company Petition has been filed seeking to wind up the Respondent Company namely M/s Subhiksha Trading Services Limited under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.2. The respondent company was incorporated as a private limited company on 10.4.1997 with authorized share capital of Rs. 33 crores consisting of 33 crore equity shares of Re. 1/- each and its main objects are as follows:(a) To trade in any articles, goods, rights possessions of any nature and of any use being industrial, commercial, household, technical and in such process to buy, sell acquire, lease any merchandise, goods or property of any form whatsoever as authorised dealers, stockists, agents, brokers, factors and render all such services in the ordinary cours...
Tag this Judgment!P.Kandaram (Deceased) and ors. Vs. N.A.Chinnadurai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 C.P.C. against the Judgment and Decree dated 28.08.1998 made in A.S.No.34 of 1997 on the file of the I Additional District Court, Erode, reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 11.10.1996 made in O.S.No.69 of 1996 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Bhavani.JUDGMENT1. The Appellants/Defendants have filed the present Second Appeal as against the Judgment and Decree dated 28.08.1998 in A.S.No.34 of 1997 passed by the Learned I Additional District Court, Erode, in reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 11.10.1996 in O.S.No.69 of 1996 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Bhavani, Erode District.2. The First Appellate Court, viz., the Learned First Additional District Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode, while passing the Judgment in A.S.No.34 of 1997 and the Cross-Objection filed by the Respondent/Plaintiff (as an Appellant) on 28.08.1998, has among things observed that the Suit in O.S.No.69 of 1996 has been filed on 13.12.1993, within three year...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendran Vs. State Thro' the Inspector Of Police.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C praying to set aside the dismissal order dated 10.05.2011 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, in Crl.M.P.No.44 of 2011 in S.C.No.430 of 2010.ORDER1. Heard both sides. Records were also perused.2.The accused 1 to 6, who have been committed for trial to the Sessions Court alleging commission of an offence punishable under section 306 IPC, are the petitioners in the criminal revision case. The petitioners herein are the relatives of the husband of the deceased Pandeeswarai. Pandeeswari committed suicide after administering poison and causing death of her minor children Nithya @ Kanagalakshmi and Jayashree. The death was reported and a case was registered on the file of Thirumangalam Taluk Police station in crime No.209 of 2009, initially under section 174 of Cr.P.C. After conducting autopsy and preliminary investigation, the case was altered into one for an offence under section 306 IPC and ...
Tag this Judgment!S.Kamarneesa Vs. the Secretary
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider, dispose of and pass orders forthwith on the petitioner's mini bus permit renewal application, dated 31.12.2011, covered by Vehicle No.TN 33 S 5627, plying on the route Dharapuram Bus Stand to Uthupalayam (via) Municipal High School, Fire Service, Bye-Pass Road Junction, Mythangarai, Dhalavaipattinam Bus Stop etc.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the permit of the petitioner had been cancelled, under Section 86 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and Rule 172(6) of the Tamilnadu Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, with effect from 23.6.2003. Therefore, the application of the petitioner, dated 31.12.2011, for the renewal of the mini bus permit, as prayed for by the petitioner, cannot be grant...
Tag this Judgment!Dr.T.Sree Renga Raja Vs. the Vice Chancellor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
PrayerWrit petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to 2nd respondent in his proceedings Ref.No.AUT-T/ESST/2011 dated 15.11.2011 and quash the same and further directing the respondents 1 and 2 to allow the petitioner to continue to function as Head of the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Anna University of Technology Trichirapalli, Trichirapalli.ORDER1. The writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the second respondent in Ref.No.AUT-T/ESST/2011 dated 15.11.2011 and further directing the respondents 1 and 2 to allow the petitioner to continue to function as Head of the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Anna University of Technology of Trichirapalli, Trichirapalli.2.The case of the petitioner is that he passed M.E., in Power System and obtained Ph.D., in Electrical Engineering. He was appointed as Assistant Professor of Electrical...
Tag this Judgment!Kannai Ammal Vs. Nava Kounder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
Appeals filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge's Court at Kallakurichi, dated 31.08.2004 in A.S.No.129 of 1998, in partly reversing and partly confirming the Judgment and Decree of the Principal District Munsif Court at Kallakurichi, dated 04.09.1998 in O.S.No.1079 of 1995.J U D G M E N T1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court in A.S.No.129 of 1998 dated 31.08.2004 in confirming the findings of the lower Court regarding declaration of title to the suit property in favour of the plaintiff and in allowing the cross-appeal filed by the plaintiff and thereby reversing the finding of the trial court regarding dismissal of the recovery of possession and for mesne profits in the suit filed in O.S.No.1079 of 1995 by the trial court on 04.09.1998.2. The appellants herein are the appellants before the first appellate Court who are the legal representatives of the deceased first appellant an...
Tag this Judgment!P.G. Chandrasekaran Vs. the Superintendent of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
Prayer: Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the respondents in connection with the impugned order passed in PR No: 98/99 dated 8.10.1999 and C. No: D2/AP 146/DEG TAN/99 DATED 16.1.2000 passed by the respondents 1 & 2 respectively and quash the same.O R D E R1. The petitioner was directly recruited as Sub Inspector of Police in the year 1976 and was promoted as Inspector of Police in 1989. The petitioner is in receipt of more than 50 rewards.2. The submission of petitioner is that he was posted as Inspector of Police, PEW, from 10.10.1998, where he was very strict in enforcing dry law in the area falling under his jurisdiction. In order to enforce dry law, a number of raids were conducted, which resulted in booking illicit arrack sellers and distillers.3. Thiru Rama Jeyam, Additional Superintendent of Police, PEW, was to retire on 31.03.1999, while working at Thanjavur Distr...
Tag this Judgment!Anburathinam Vs. the Karur Municipality.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
PRAYERWrit Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned resolution bearing No.52, dated 29.12.2011 passed by the second respondent insofar as the portion which relates to the cancellation of lease and demolition of the shopping complex read with notice dated 29.12.2011 in Na.Ka.No.A6/4041/2010 passed by the first respondent and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to continue to carry on their business till the expiry of the lease period.ORDER1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the decision taken by Karur Municipality at its meeting held on 29 December, 2011, to demolish and reconstruct the shopping complex situated at the old bus stand and for the said purpose, to cancel the licence granted in favour of the petitioners. BACKGROUND FACTS:2. The petitioners are the lessees of shop rooms in a shopping complex cons...
Tag this Judgment!A.Saroja Vs. the Chief Educational Officer.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 2nd respondent in Se Mu Ka No.7/2001 dated 27.06.2001 and quash the same.O R D E R1. Petitioner is working as sewing mistress at the government High School, Ambikapuram, Trichy District. The petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds, on 27.06.1979.2. The case of the petitioner is that before appointment, the Chief Educational Officer, Trichy had informed the Director of School Education that the petitioner had failed in S.S.L.C examination but she possessed technical qualifications prescribed for appointment as sewing mistress.3. The Director of School Education clarified vide L.Dis.No.97991/C-23/78 dated 13.10.1978, that the petitioner was qualified for appointment to the post of sewing mistress as per qualification prescribed under the Special Rules, and further that she was also within the age limit prescribed fo...
Tag this Judgment!Ganapathy Vs. the Commissioner of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
PRAYERThe Habeas Corpus petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the body of the detenu namely Mani @ Estate Mani aged about 30 years son of Ganapathy before this Court who is now detained in the Central Prison, Palayamkottai in pursuant to the detention order passed by the 1st respondent in No.09/BDFGISSV/2011 dated 26.08.2011 and to call for the records and quash the same and release the detenue at liberty forthwith.ORDER1. (Order of this Court was made by N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR,J.) The Habeas Corpus petition is filed by the father of the detenu viz., Mani @ Estate Mani aged about 30 years, challenging the order of detention No.9/BDFGISSV/ 2011 dated 26.08.2011 passed under Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act No.14 of 1982), d...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »