Chennai Court February 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.
R. Pazhani Murugan Vs. the Secretary
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2012
Writ Petition has been filed under section 226 of the Constitution of India to issue an order of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to permit the petitioner to attend the interview scheduled to be held on 25.11.2009 or any other date by declaring the petitioner's result for the examination conducted pursuant to Advertisement No.162 and consequently appoint the petitioner for the post of Assistant Electrical Inspector in Tamilnadu Electrical Inspectorate Service, post code No.1728 and pass further orders.ORDER1. The Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a Mandamus, directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to attend the interview scheduled to be held on 25.11.2009 or any other date by declaring the petitioner's result for the examination conducted pursuant to Advertisement No.162 and consequently appoint the petitioner for the post of Assistant Electrical Inspector in Tamil Nadu Electrical Inspectorate Service, post code No.1728.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner ...
S.Prabhakar Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 29.08.2011 to re-convey the land of the petitioners situated at Sankarapuram Village, Ambur Municipal Town, Vaniyambadi Taluk, Vellore District, comprised in T.S.No.5/10C, Ward E, Block No.3, measuring an extent of 21 cents (i.e.) 0.922 sq. metres and decide the matter in accordance with law.O R D E R1. This writ petition is filed for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 29.08.2011 to re-convey their land situated at Sankarapuram Village, Ambur Municipal Town, Vaniyambadi Taluk, Vellore District, comprised in T.S.No.5/10C, Ward E, Block No.3, measuring an extent of 21 cents (i.e.) 0.922 sq. metres and decide the matter in accordance with law.2. Facts of the case as put forth in the affidavit would run thus:(a) Petitioners 1 and 2 are join...
The Director of Income Tax Vs. the Chartered Accountant Study
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2012
Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Chennai dated 04.7.2011 passed in I.T.A.No.1971/(Mds)/2010.Judgment(Delivered by D.MURUGESAN,J.)1. This Tax Case Appeal is filed by the Revenue, raising the following substantial question of law:Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in directing to grant the assessee the renewal of its approval u/s.80G of the Act without considering the material fact that the activities of the assessee are not as per Section 2(15) of the Act?2. The assessee-trust is a Society known as The Chartered Accountants Study Circle. The aims and objects of the Society among other things are as follows: a. To conduct periodical meetings on professional subjects;b. To publish books, booklets, etc. on professional subjects;c. To organise Seminars, Conventions, Conferences, etc., as may be deemed fit from time to time;d. To make representation ...
S.Soundarajan Vs. the Assistant Commissioner (Ct)
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2012
Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, to call for the records of the respondent in TIN.3372421855/2010-11 and quash the order dated 24.10.2011.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.2.The main contention raised by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the impugned order, dated 24.10.2011, has been passed by the respondent without hearing the petitioner and without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to file the relevant documents, to substantiate his claims.3.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had submitted that a notice, dated 25.08.2011, had been issued to the petitioner. However, as the petitioner did not file his objections, the respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 24.10.2011.4.At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the pe...
P.Mani Vs. Kalyani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-2012
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of Family Court Act against the decree and judgment dated 24.06.2004 made in F.C.O.P.No.35 of 1997 on the file of Family Court, Salem.JUDGMENTR.BANUMATHI,J1. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of F.C.O.P.No.35 of 1997 on the file of Family Court, Salem (dated 24.06.2004) on the ground of non-appearance of appellant, the appellant has preferred this appeal.2. Brief facts are that the marriage between appellant and respondent was solemnised on 8.11.1989 at Kosaripatti in Sankari Taluk and two female children were born to them. The spouses were living in Armed Reserve Quarters at Annathanapatti village, Salem. In the year 1994, differences arose between spouses and inspite of the advice by the police, the appellant and respondent could not reconcile their differences. The appellant filed F.C.O.P.No.35 of 1997 seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion under Sections 13(1)(i-a) (i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Since the...
Mayandi Vs. Ananthammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-2012
Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C praying to set aside the order passed in M.C.No.47 of 2009 dated 19.04.2011 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Tirunelveli.ORDER1. Notice before admission was ordered and served on the respondent. The respondent is represented by a counsel. The present criminal revision case has been filed against an order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli made in M.C.No.47 of 2009 on 19.04.2011 enhancing the monthly maintenance amount awarded by the said court in the earlier order from Rs.450/- to Rs.1,250/-.2.The said order came to be passed in a petition filed under section 127 Cr.P.C seeking enhancement of monthly maintenance amount, challenging the said order on the ground that the order is too onerous for the petitioner as he has been directed to pay a major chunk of his income derived as a pensioner. The respondent, who has entered appearance through counsel resists this revision contending that...
V.R. Radhakrishnan Vs. the Executive Engineer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-2012
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records insofar relates to the proceedings of the first respondents in his proceedings in letter No.EE/W/MDU/AE/I ER/AA No. 09/02-03/D.No.1129/02, dated 30.10.2002 and quash the same.ORDER1. This writ petition is filed praying to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for the entire records insofar it relates to the proceedings of the first respondents in his proceedings in letter No.EE/W/MDU/AE/I ER/AA No. 09/02-03/D.No.1129/02, dated 30.10.2002 and quash the same.2. The petitioner is a company by name Sri Valli Rubbers and is a consumer of power in Service No.1541 TF III B. On 23.8.2002 at 11.10 hours, Anti Power Theft squad made a surprise inspection of the petitioner industry in the presence of one Selvaraj, representative of the petitioner industry and they found a hole on the top of the meter and it was found that through the hole, the meter was tampered, the recording m...
Chokkalingam Vs. the District Collector
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-2012
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of CPC against the Judgment and decree dated 23.06.2009 passed in Appeal Suit No.154 of 2008 by the Sub Court, Theni confirming the Judgment and decree dated 26.12.2007 passed in Original Suit No.106 of 2006 by the District Munsif - cum - Judicial Magistrate Court, Bodinaickanur.JUDGMENT1. The concurrent Judgments and decrees passed in Original Suit No.106 of 2006 by the District Munsif - cum - Judicial Magistrate Court, Bodinaickanur and in Appeal Suit No.154 of 2008 by the Sub Court, Theni are being challenged in the present Second Appeal.2. The appellants herein as plaintiffs have instituted Original Suit No.106 of 2006 for the reliefs of declaration and perpetual injunction, wherein the present respondents have been shown as defendants.3. The material averments averred in the plaint are that the suit properties are originally formed part of Bodinaickanur Zamin, in which the predecessors in title of the plaintiffs have had occupancy right. The e...
Ms.Sundaram Agencies Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 to 5 from permitting the 6th respondent to carry on business as wholesale dealer of kerosene at Kumbakonam without a proper licence and from allotting quantities in excess of 250 kiloletres of kerosene to the 6th respondent in accordance with the circular of the Government of India, Ministry of Petroleum, dated 22.7.1987 bearing Ref.D.O.No.P-19014/54/84-IOC and consequently to allot the petitioner the maximum monthly allotment of 250 kilolitres.O R D E R1. The above writ petition is filed for issuance of writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 to 5 from permitting the 6th respondent to carry on business as wholesale dealer of kerosene at Kumbakonam without a proper licence and from allotting quantities in excess of 250 kiloletres of kerosene to the 6th respondent in accordance with the circular of the Government of India, Ministry of Petroleum, dated...
P.Lakshmanapillai. Vs. A.Elangovan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-10-2012
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of Family Court Act against the decree and judgment dated 24.06.2004 made in F.C.O.P.No.35 of 1997 on the file of Family Court, Salem.JUDGMENTR.BANUMATHI,J1. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of F.C.O.P.No.35 of 1997 on the file of Family Court, Salem (dated 24.06.2004) on the ground of non-appearance of appellant, the appellant has preferred this appeal.2. Brief facts are that the marriage between appellant and respondent was solemnised on 8.11.1989 at Kosaripatti in Sankari Taluk and two female children were born to them. The spouses were living in Armed Reserve Quarters at Annathanapatti village, Salem. In the year 1994, differences arose between spouses and inspite of the advice by the police, the appellant and respondent could not reconcile their differences. The appellant filed F.C.O.P.No.35 of 1997 seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion under Sections 13(1)(i-a) (i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Since the...