Chennai Court March 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.
Dr.M.Bala Soudarssanane Vs. Government of IndiA.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
ORDERELIPE DHARMA RAO, J.1. The question involved in this writ petition is 'whether an employee, who was transferred from one place to other but neither joined his new station nor applied leave, even though he was relieved from his duties at his earlier posting, is entitled for his wages and other service benefits, as if he continued in service, from the date he was relieved till the date he re-joined duty, on the ground that his transfer order from one station to other has been quashed by judicial fora, finding it to be tainted with bias and mala fide.'2. The petitioner is a Professor and Head of the Department of Preventive and Social Medicine Department in the second respondent Institute. While so, by the order dated 10.1.2003, he was transferred from the second respondent Institute to Sardarjung Hospital, New Delhi, in public interest with immediate effect. According to the petitioner, at the relevant time, he was on winter vacation and was on conference duty from 1.1.2003 to 21.1....
Alliance Francoise Vs. Egalammalle at Rakeny PoulaIn and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
JUDGMENT1. This appeal is focussed by the first defendant in the suit, as against the judgement and decree dated 25.10.1993 passed by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Pondicherry, in O.S.No.650 of 1985.2. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.3. A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of these appeals would run thus:The respondents 1 to 5 herein, as plaintiffs, filed the suit on various grounds, the gist and kernal of them would run thus:(a) The property described in the plaint originally belonged to one Poulain Charele Magne Malie Maurice; he got married one Olive Claudine Laura Marie on 21.11.1900; during the wedlock, a son, namely, Poulain Andra Marie Ame'de was born to them, for nothing but to die in unmarried state, at the young age itself. Thereafter, the wife, namely, Olive Claudine Laura Marie got divorce as against her husband. Whereupon, the su...
M.Selvam Son of Muthusamy Vs. the Inspector of Police.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
ORDER1. Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, the Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.2. In view of the averments made by the petitioner and taking into consideration the relief prayed for by the petitioner and since similar orders have been passed by this Court, the first respondent is directed to release the lorry bearing Registration No.TN24 K 9614, to the petitioner on his fulfilling the following conditions:-(i) The petitioner shall establish the ownership of the vehicle by producing the necessary documents and the certificates before the respondent including the R.C. Book.(ii) The petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle in any manner, till the adjudication proceedings are completed;(iii) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) in cash, with the first respondent;(iv) The petitioner shall give an undertaking before the first respondent that he shall not use the vehicle, for any illegal purpose, in future and that he shall ...
Ms.Flakt (India) Limited Vs. the Presiding Officer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
COMMON ORDER1. All the three writ petitions challenges the same Award in I.D.No.58 of 1999, dated 26.3.2008 passed by the II Additional Labour Court, Chennai. By the impugned Award, the labour court had directed reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service, but without backwages.2.In W.P.No.16810 of 2008, the petitioner is M/s.Flakt (India) Ltd., Numbal village, Chennai-600 077, represented by its General Manager. That writ petition was admitted on 16.7.2008. Pending the writ petition, this court had granted an interim stay. Subsequently, the workman P.Ramasamy filed two applications, one for vacate the stay granted and the another for the grant of an interim direction in M.P.Nos.4 and 5 of 2008. In those two applications, this court after observing that since Flakt (India) Ltd. has been taken over by M/s.Asea Brown Boveri Ltd.,, whether the labour court had put notice on the new company was doubted and therefore, the court did not grant any direction and declined to grant a...
Tmt. K.Renuka Vs. the Government of Tamilnadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a Wit of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the 4th respondent District Educational Officer Kanchipuram Na. Ka.No. 1292/A1/2011 dated 04.07.2011 granting approval to the School Committee of W.T. Masilamani Mudaliar Higher Secondary school Walajabad Kanchipuram quash the same For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thyagarajan, S.C.,ORDER1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order Na. Ka.No. 1292/A1/2011 dated 04.07.2011 approving the School Committee of W.T. Masilamani Mudaliar Higher Secondary School, Walajabad, Kanchipuram.2. The grand father of late W.T.Masilamani Mudaliyar formed a Trust Ambalavanar Araporuppu Ayam at Walajabad, Kanchipuram in the year 1963, with an object to give best education to the local people, who are socially and educationally backward.3. The Trust started various schools in and around the area and ...
E.Subbammal Vs. R.Rajendran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
JUDGMENT1. Challenge in this Second Appeal is to the Judgment and decree dated 31.08.2006 passed in Appeal Suit No.117 of 2006 by the First Additional Sub Court, Tirunelveli, wherein the Judgment and decree dated 28.10.2005 passed in Original Suit No.540 of 2004 by the Second Additional District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli are reversed.2. The first respondent herein as plaintiff has instituted Original Suit No.540 of 2004 on the file of the trial Court praying to declare that the plaintiff is having right of pre-emption in respect of suit property and for directing the defendants to execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff after receipt of Rs.45,000/- and also for directing them to hand over vacant possession of the suit property to the plaintiff, wherein the present appellant and the second respondent have been shown as defendants.3. The nubble of the averments made in the plaint are that the suit property and its adjacent property are originally belonged to two brothers namely C....
Tvl.Revathi Home Needs Vs. the Assistant Commissioner.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
ORDER1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for both sides.2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the respondent had issued a notice, dated 30.11.2011, asking the petitioner to file its objections, if any, on the proposal made in the said notice, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The petitioner had sent its objections, dated 8.12.2011, to the notice, dated 30.11.2011, issued by the respondent. The objections filed by the petitioner had been received at the office of the respondent, on 12.12.2011. However, in the impugned order of the respondent, dated 22.12.2011, it has been stated that the petitioner had not filed any objections and therefore, the impugned order had been passed, asking the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,86,075/-, as tax, and Rs.4,29,113/-, as penalty. As such, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 22.12.2011, has been passed by the respondent, without proper application of mind. Therefo...
Castrol India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
Mathew John: 1. The appellants are manufacturers of lubricating oils of various specifications. They have been availing the benefit of MODVAT credit of excise duty paid on inputs as well as packing materials used in the manufacture of such finished lubricating oils. 2. On 26.3.96, the officers of Central Excise department visited the factory of the appellants and conducted a stock taking. They found shortage of 28,760 ltrs. of finished goods, 1,02,739 kgs. of inputs and 69,805 nos. of packing materials in the physical stock available as compared to the accounted stock. The Revenue proposed to demand excise duty in respect of finished goods found short as also reversal of the CENVAT credit taken on inputs and packing materials which were found short. A show-cause notice issued in this regard was adjudicated confirming demand of duty of Rs.1,21,109/- in respect of finished goods, Rs.19,06,004/- in respect of inputs and packing materials. Further, a penalty of Rs.1,21,109/- was imposed un...
G.J.Rama Subba Reddy Vs. the Commanding Officer, 26 Maratha Light Infa ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Mar-19-2012
ORDER(Order of the Tribunal made by Justice ACA Adityan)The applicant challenging the order of discharge under the impugned order has approached the Honourable Andhra Pradesh High Court at Hyderabad for setting aside the impugned order. After the constitution of the Armed Forces Tribunal under the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, under Section 34 of AFT Act, the said Writ Petition has been transferred to this Tribunal on the point of jurisdiction and renumbered as T.A.No.119 of 2009 and was dismissed for default once and the same was restored to file as per the order in M.A.No.5 of 2012 today.2. As per the applicant, he had enrolled as a Soldier in the Indian Army with effect from 25th February 2002 and while serving, he went on leave from 07.04.2008 to 08.05.2008 and due to some family circumstances, viz., sudden heart attack of his father-in-law, he could not report to his Unit after the expiry of the leave. According to the applicant, he had asked for extension of another one month ...
Hasan Ammal Vs. the Kadayanallur Police Station.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-16-2012
Prayer : This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent No.1 to appoint Mr.C.M.Arumugam practicing Advocate at Madurai, as Special Public Prosecutor in P.R.C.No.58 of 2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi in Crime No.391 of 2006 on the file of the respondent No.2.ORDER1. The writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the first respondent State of Tamilnadu to appoint Mr.C.M.Arumugam, practicing Advocate at Madurai, as Special Public Prosecutor in P.R.C.No.58 of 2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi in Crime No.391 of 2006 investigated by the second respondent Deputy Superintendent of Police.2. Notice was issued to the respondents on 19.01.2011. On notice from this Court, the second respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 08.11.2011, to which the petitioner has filed a reply affidavit dated 15.11.2011. Taking exception ...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »