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.
V.Dilip Kumar Vs. State Rep. by Deputy Superintendent of Polic.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
Prayer:Criminal Appeals filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 10.02.2006 made in C.C.No.5 of 1999 on the file of the learned Additional Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Chennai.COMMONJUDGMENT1. The Criminal Appeals arise out of the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 10.02.2006, made in C.C.No.5 of 1999, on the file of the learned Additional Special Judge for C.B.I. cases, Chennai, whereby the accused 1, 3 and 4 were convicted for an offence under Section 120B IPC and sentenced them to undergo each one year rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default in payment to undergo each three months simple imprisonment. A1 was further convicted for an offence under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000/- ( 1 count) in default in payment to undergo three months simple imprisonment. A3 was further convic...
Shree Karthik Papers Ltd Vs. the Assistant Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 30.1.2012 in regard to the refund of the excess sales tax paid for the year 2004-2005 forthwith.O R D E R1. Mr.A.R.Jayaprathap, the learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondent.2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 30.1.2012, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.3. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 30.1.2012, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four ...
Mohanasundaram Vs. Kishanlal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
JUDGEMENT1. This appeal is focussed by the defendant in the suit, as against the judgement and decree dated 26.11.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge cum Fast Track Court No.I, Chengalpattu, in O.S.No.65 of 2006, which was one for specific performance of an agreement to sell.2. The parties, for the sake of convenience, 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 this appeal would run thus:(i) The respondent herein, as plaintiff, filed the suit for specific performance based on the agreement to sell-Ex.A1 dated 20.9.2004, which emerged between the plaintiff on the one side and the defendant. Whereby, the latter agreed to sell in favour of the former the suit property for a total sale consideration to be calculated at the rate of Rs.6000/- per cent. An advance of Rs.five thousand was paid by the plaintiff to the d...
Ms. Jaihind Spinning Mills Vs. the Assistant Commissioner.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent herein to permit the petitioner to pay the entire arrears of Tax amounting to Rs.4,06,092/- relating to the assessment year 2008-2009 under the CST Act 1956 in 15 equated monthly installments.O R D E R1. Mr.A.R.Jayaprathap, the learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondent.2. Heard the learned counsels appearing for both sides.3. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent had submitted that the entire arrears of tax, amounting to Rs.4,06,092/-, may be directed to be paid by the petitioner, in ten equated monthly installments, beginning from 20.3.2012.4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had consented to pay the entire arrears of tax amount, as stated by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.5. In view of the above, the pe...
G.R.Swamy Vs. the Presiding Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus after calling for the records relating to the Award in Award in I.D.No.13 of 2007, dated 25.6.2008 from the file of the first respondent Tribunal and quash the same and consequently to direct the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service together with backwages, continuity of service and all other attendant benefits and to award costs.ORDER1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who is an employee of the India Bank, challenging an Award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court (for short CGIT) made in I.D.No.13 of 2007, dated 25.6.2008. By the impugned Award, the CGIT declined to grant any relief to the petitioner and upheld the punishment of compulsory retirement with all terminal benefits is legal and that the reference was rejected.2.In the writ petition, notice of motion was ordered on 12.09.2...
D.C.M.Hyndai Ltd Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
W.P.No.12272 of 2005 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent pertaining to the order bearing G.O.(D)No.1536, Labour and Employment, dated 27.12.2004 and quash the same. W.P.No.10362 of 2009 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the Award dated 08.08.2008 made in I.D.No.44 of 2003 on the file of the first respondent herein and quash the same. W.P.No.10363 of 2009 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the G.O.(D)No.847, Labour and Employment, dated 26.8.2003 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.COMMON ORDER1. All the three writ petitions were filed by the same management. In the first writ petition, the petitioner challenges an order of the State Gov...
V.Krishnan Vs State Rep. by Inspector of Polic.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
COMMON J UDGMENT1. The Criminal Appeals arise out of the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 10.02.2006, made in C.C.No.3 of 1999, on the file of the learned Additional Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Chennai, whereby the accused were convicted for the offences under Sections 120B, 409, 420, 477(A) IPC and Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(C) & 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced them to undergo each one year rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default in payment to undergo each three months simple imprisonment for an offence under Section 120B IPC and further sentenced them to undergo each two years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.3,000/- each in default in payment to undergo each six months simple imprisonment for the offences under Sections 409, 420, 477(A) IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C.Act, 1988. Both the accused were directed to undergo the period of sentences concurrently.2.The resp...
Consumer Protection Council. Vs. National Highways Authority of IndiA.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first and second respondents to expeditiously implement their expression of willingness in communication bearing No.NHAI/PD/Try/NH-A4/VIC/2008/1738 dated 25.8.2008 for construction of an underpass at the G corner junction to facilitate access to vehicles from the Trichy side of the four lane Highway to Golden Rock in Tiruchirappalli.ORDER(Order of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN, J)1. The present Writ Petition is a public interest litigation at the instance of the Consumer Protection Council, Tiruchirappalli, for a Mandamus to direct the first and second respondents to expeditiously implement their expression of willingness in communication bearing No.NHAI/PD/Try/NH-A4/VIC/2008/1738 dated 25.8.2008 in respect of construction of an underpass at the G corner junction to facilitate access to vehicles from the Trichy side of the four lane Highway to Golden Rock in Tiruchir...
A.S.M.Balasubramanian Vs. A.S.M.Radhakrishnan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
JUDGMENT1. A.S.No.249 of 2007 is focussed by the first defendant and A.S.No.420 of 2007 is focussed by the plaintiff, as against the judgment and decree dated 31.07.2006 passed in O.S.No.2074 of 1996, which was one for partition, on the file of the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.2. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.3. A recounting and recapitulation of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of these two appeals would run thus:(i) The plaintiff - Radhakrishnan filed the suit for partition with the following prayers:(a) For partition and separate possession of his 66/280 share in the suit property(b) On the defendants failing to do so, the Court itself by appointing an Advocate Commissioner to divide the suit property by metes and bounds and allot the plaintiff's 66/280 share and to deliver possession of the same and pass a final decree in terms thereof. (extracted as...
Tmt.Rajakanni Vs. the Assistant Director
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-13-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in File No.ECIR/03/CZ/PMLA/2009 dated 23.09.2009 and quash the same. W.P.No.20449 of 2009:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in File No.ECIR/03/CZ/PMLA/2009 dated 23.09.2009 and quash the same. W.P.No.20450 of 2009:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in File No.ECIR/03/CZ/PMLA/2009 dated 23.09.2009 and quash the same. W.P.No.20215 of 2009:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in File No.ECIR/03/CZ/PMLA/2009 dated 23.09.2009 and quash the sam...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »