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.
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Tvl.Glaxo India Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
Memorandum of Grounds of Tax Case Revision Petitions under Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 against the order dated 26.04.2002 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Main Bench), Chennai passed in T.A.Nos.464 and 465 of 2001 for the assessment years 1994-95 and 1993-94.ORDERD.MURUGESAN, J.1. Both the tax case revision petitions are filed by the Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Chennai (North) Division questioning the common order passed by the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Main Bench), Chennai in T.A.Nos.464 and 465 of 2001 dated 26.4.2002 for the assessment years 1994-95 and 1993-94 respectively and raising the following substantial question of law:- Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the nycil prickly heat powder is a drug that would come under Entry 20-A of Part C of the First Schedule and would not come under Entry 1(iii) of Part F of the First Schedule which deals wit...
P.Alagusamy Vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
PrayerAppeal filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the judgment of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputtur, in S.C.No.40 of 1998 by his judgment dated 29/08/2005, and acquit the appellant from the charges.P.DEVADASS ,J.1. Appellant Alagusamy, who is A3 in crime No.94 of 1989 of Keela Rajakularaman Police Station was tried in Sessions Case No.40 of 1998 before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar Sessions Division at Srivilliputhur for offences under Sections 341 and 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. was acquitted under Section 341 I.P.C., but convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. and was sentenced to life.2. Let us narrate the case of the prosecution in brief as under:(i) A.1 Perumal married Veerammal, sister of Veeran (deceased). A.2 Muthusamy and appellant Alagusamy (A3) are their sons. Veeran's daughters are Veerammal (P.W.2) and Chellammal. They lived in Thirukothayapuram @ Sangampatti in Rajapalayam Taluk in Viruthunagar D...
R.Natarajan Vs. the Chief Executive Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 16.4.2002 Ref:K2/14393/01 and the consequential communication dated 31.7.2002 Ref:K2/14393/02 fixing the quarterly installment payable by the petitioner for his Shop No.D-83 in Koyambedu Wholesale Market Complex at Rs.1,32,063/- and levying penal interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 17.9.2001 to 31.3.2002 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent authority to fix the quarterly installment payable by the petitioner for his Shop No.D-83 in Koyambedu Wholesale Market Complex without levying any interest up to 1.7.2002 and adjusting the entire payment made by the petitioner up to 20.3.2002.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 16.4.2002 Ref:K2/14393/01 and the consequential c...
Ms.C.B.Muthuswamy Chettiar. Vs. Ms.Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
JUDGMENT1. This appeal is focussed at the instance of the defendants as against the judgment and decree dated 20.11.2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.V), Chennai in O.S.No.862 of 2002, which was filed by the plaintiff for recovery of money.2. The parties, for convenience sake, are referred to here under according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.3. A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this appeal would run thus:a] The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of money with the following prayer: - to pass a judgment and decree against the defendants to pay jointly and severally a sum of Rs.5,96,979.62 ps together with interest on Rs.4,07,494.63 ps at 18% per annum payable from the date of plaint till the date of realisation. (extracted as such)b] The defendants filed the written statement resisting the suit.c] Whereupon, the trial court framed t...
Nafisa NooruddIn Buriyawala Vs. the Secretary to Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a Wit of Certified Mandamus, calling for the entire records in connection with the 1st respondent notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act in G.O.Ms.No.203, Planning Development and Special Initiative (S1) Department dated 24.11.2010 and the consequential declaration made under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act in G.O.Ms.No.378, Planning Development and Special Initiative Department dated 15.12.2010 and quash the said proceedings dated 24.11.2010 and 15.12.2010 and consequently forbear the respondents from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property bearing Old Door No.4/13, New No.25, Davidson Street, George Town, Chennai-600 001.O R D E R1. The petitioner has approached this Court, with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the notification, issued under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act dat...
Smt.Latha Vs. the Sub-divisional Executive
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
PrayerCriminal Revision case filed under Sections 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the initiation of proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A1/5355/2011 dated 12.09.2011 on the file of Sub-Divisional Executive Magistrate cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichy.ORDER1. The arguments advanced by Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned counsel for the petitioner and by Mrs.S.Prabha, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) representing the respondents were heard.2. The present revision has been filed challenging the summons dated 12.09.2011 issued by the Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchirappalli in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A1/5355/2011 under section 145 of the Criminal Proceedure Code, 1973 directing the petitioners herein and two other persons citing them as 'A' party and eight other persons citing them as 'B' party to appear before the said Executive Magistrate at 4.00 p.m on 17.09.2011 for an enquiry under section 145 of Cr.P.C.3. The said summons is challenged on the sh...
A.N.Thirumal Vs. the Managing Director
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to grant terminal benefits like gratutity, leave salary etc., due and payable to the petitioner as on the date of his retirment in the year 2000 together with interest at such rate.O R D E R1. Petitioner has approached this court, with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to release the terminal benefits like gratuity, leave salary etc., due and payable to the petitioner.2. The petitioner retired from the post of Deputy Manager (D.E) from the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Milk Producers Federation (TCMPF) on 29.02.2000. The petitioner was allowed to retire without prejudice to the surcharge proceedings, which were said to be pending against the petitioner under Section 87 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act.3. The petitioner was granted provisional pension, for the period, the petitioner had served with Tamilnad...
C.Zophar Jothi Paul, Vs. the State Represented By, the Inspector of Po ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C praying to call for the entire records pertaining to the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District in Cr.M.P.No.2711 of 2010, dated 29.06.2010 and set aside the same and consequently, direct the learned Magistrate to forward the petitioner's complaint filed in terms of section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C to the respondent police for registration of an F.I.R.ORDER1. The complainant, who preferred a petition under section 156(3) Cr.P.C before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thoothukudi which was taken on file as Cr.M.P.No.2711 of 2010, is the petitioner in the present criminal revision case. Though the said petition was filed under section 156(3) Cr.P.C seeking an order directing the 1st respondent police to register a case and investigate the same, the learned Judicial Magistrate chose to take cognizance of the offence and direct the petitioner to appear for being examined on oath ...
Ms.L.G.Electronics India Private Limited. Vs. the Government of Tamil ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the stay order No.Sp.No.6/11, in Ap.ST.No.10/11, dated 19.1.2012, passed by the 2nd respondent, quash the same and consequently, direct the 2nd respondent to hear the appeal without insistence on any further payment of tax or bank guarantee.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents.2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the stay order, dated 19.1.2012, passed by the second respondent, in Sp.No.6/11, in Ap.CST.No.10/11.3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the demand of tax had arisen only due to the clerical errors in the Central Sales Tax return filed by the petitioner, for the months of May and August of the year, 2008, and for the month of March, 2009, relating to the assessment year 2008-200...
Ms.Umang Overseas Vs. the Commissioner of Customs
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2012
PrayerWrit petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to grant provisional release on the goods covered under Shipping Bill No.2302618, 2302619, 2302623 all dated 21.01.2011 and Shipping Bill No.2401710, 2401712, 2401737 all dated 02.02.2011 in terms of provision of Section 18 read with Section 110 A of the Customs Act and in accordance with Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 1963.ORDER1. A partnership firm, who is in the business of export, has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondent to grant provisional release of the goods, covered under shipping bill Nos. 2302618, 2302619, 2302623 all dated 21.01.2011 and Shipping Bill Nos. 2401710, 2401712, 2401737 all dated 02.02.2011 in terms of provision of Section 18 read with Section 110A of the Customs Act and in accordance with Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 1963.2. According to the petitioner, they are in the business of ex...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »