Chennai Court April 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.
Tmt.Sabeena Vs. Ms.National Insurance Company
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
PRAYERAppeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order dated 28.05.2002 in M.C.O.P.No.341 of 1999 on the file of the First Additional District Sessions cum Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Madurai.JUDGMENTR.BANUMATHI, J1. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation of Rs.13,54,480/- awarded for the death of the deceased Kamal Nazar, claimants have preferred this appeal seeking for enhancement.2. On 7.9.1998, the deceased Kamal Nazar was proceeding in his Motor Cycle bearing Regn.No.TN-F-0172. One Srinivasan was the pillion rider. At about 4.45 p.m., when the motor cycle was proceeding in Madurai - Thirupparankundram Road, a Lorry bearing Regn.No.TNL 4685 insured with the first respondent herein came from behind driven in a rash and negligent manner and hit against the motor cycle. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. Regarding the accident, a criminal case was registered against the lorry driver in Crime No.73 of 1...
K.Gunamani Vs. the Registrar of Coop. Societies
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
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 memo Na.Ka.No.499/2011 A1 dated 29.3.2011 of the 2nd respondent along with the consequential memo No.1 dated 31.3.2011 of the 4th respondent quash both the memos and consequently direct the 2nd and 4th respondents to permit the petitioner to retire from service on superannuation with effect from 31.3.2011, without reference to the criminal case with all service benefits.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent had submitted that the fourth respondent is willing to pay the retiral benefits to the petitioner, as prayed for by him, in the present writ petition. It had been further submitted that a sum of Rs.72,000/- had already be...
Annai Lourdu Educational Trust Vs. the Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Municipal Township Commissioner, to desist from causing any disturbance for laying fencing in the land and using the same as play ground for the school children by the petitioner Educational Trust Schools, in the land in S.Nos.210 and 239, in No.24, Vilinjiambakkam Revenue Village, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District.O R D E R1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Municipal Township Commissioner, to desist from causing any disturbance for laying fencing in the land and using the same as play ground for the school children by the petitioner Educational Trust Schools, in the land in S.Nos.210 and 239, in No.24, Vilinjiambakkam Revenue Village, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District.2. Mr.Visakamoorthy, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondent. By consent, the writ petition is ...
Dr.P.Elango Vs. the General Manager
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to provide pathway through the Railway land in Town Survey No.12, 15, 16, 17, 16/2B, 21 and 25 of Ward No.D Block No.4, Namakkal Town from the petitioner's land in T.S.No.15/7A and 22/5A based upon his representation dated 07.09.2010, 23.05.2011 and 07.08.2011 and also in consonance of the orders of this Hon'ble Court as made in W.P.No.7807 of 2010 dated 26.07.2010.O R D E R1. Learned counsel for the respondents has placed on record a letter received from the Southern Railway, pointing out that the Railway Administration shall allow the petitioner to use the Railway land as pathway, as sufficient "land width" is available in front of petitioner's land to facilitate him to use pathway for approaching his land, through railway land without any obstruction. The road shall, however, be used by the petitioner as per usual terms and cond...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ms. Eco Media (P) Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Tax Case Appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai D Bench, dated 24.8.2004 passed in I.T.A.No. 2242/Mds/2003.JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J)1. Tax Case (Appeal) is filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal. The above Tax Case (Appeal) is in respect of assessment year 1993-94 and the same is admitted on the following substantial question of law:-"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in setting aside the order of the lower authority and delete the entire addition of Rs.2,29,420/- on the ground the reopening under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act is not valid on the basis of the factual error pointed out by the audit party? "2. The assessee is a private limited company. The assessee received a sum of Rs.2,29,420/- being an award money for its film "Silent Valley" "An Indian Rain Forest" and claimed exemption under Section 10(17a) o...
M.Murugesan Vs. T.R.Adhikesavan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the fair and decreetal order of the Court of the District Munsif, Arani at Tiruvannamalai District made I.A.No.250 of 2004 in O.S.No.86 of 1994, dated 08.08.2006.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 08.08.2006 passed by the learned District Munsif, Arani at Tiruvannamalai District in I.A.No.250 of 2004 in O.S.No.86 of 1994, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the lower Court.3. A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision would run thus:The revision petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit in the Sub Court, Arni for recovering a sum of Rs.31,971.00 based on the suit promissory note with subsequent interest and cost. It appears the defendant entered appearance and contested the matter. In the meanwhile, on the point of jurisdiction the case was transferred to the Sub Cour...
D. Nicholas Vs. the Registrar and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records in reference No.1340/Estt./AGB/2008 dt. 17.09.2008 on the file of the third respondent and to quash the impugned letter in reference No.1340/Estt./AGB/2008 dated 17.09.2008 on the file of the third respondent and direct the third respondent to revise the pay at Rs.5300/- in the scale of pay of Rs.5000-150-8000 upto March 1996 and Rs.5450/- from 1.4.1996 upto the date of retirement i.e.30.6.1996 and consequent to revision of pay.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel for the respondents.2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had placed before this Court the proceedings, dated 31.03.2008, issued by the first respondent, fixing the pension payable to the petitioner. He had further submitted that the petitioner had not challen...
N.Munuswamy Vs. the Commissioner, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.01.2012 and pass orders.O R D E R1. The petitioner is the resident of new Gummidipoondi Village and Taluk, Thiruvallur District. There are two important temples in the Village; one is Shri Ellaiamman Temple and Shri Chandrasekaraswamy Temple. There are other temples also in the Village.2. Shri Chandrasekaraswamy Temple owns 2.98 acres of land in S.No.286 in the above Village. Shri Ellaiamman Temple is the owner of 4.82 acres of land in S.No.292/1 and 1.32 acres in S.No.284/1 in the said Village. These two temples are public temples. The day today administration of the temple is being conducted from the contribution of the general public of the said Village.3. The petitioner claims to be worshipper of the said temple. The said two temples come within the purview of ...
Ms.Roshan Trading Corporation Ltd. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
REVISION filed before the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal to revise the order dated 27.11.2001 made in T.A.No.928/1999 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Chennai for the assessment year 1992-93. After the abolition of the Tribunal, the matters have been transferred to this Court.C O M M O N O R D E R(Order of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.)1. The assessee is on revision as against the order of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (Additional Bench) dated 27.11.2001 in T.A.No.928/99, relating to the assessment year 1992-93.2. It is seen from the documents placed before this court that there was an inspection made by the Enforcement Wing Officials, Madras North on 20.4.1993 in the business premises of the assessee. At the time of the inspection, the following irregularities were noticed.i. Rough Day Book maintained and produced was found posted upto 17.4.93 only;ii. No stock book has been maintained and produced for insp...
K.Marimuthu Vs. the Additional Registrar of Special Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to Demand Notices dated 23.12.2011 issued by the third respondent to the petitioner in respect of his Non-Farm Loan Accounts and quashing them as illegal and arbitrary and further directing the respondents and more particularly the third respondent to receive the payments made by the petitioner vide Receipts No.000821 dated 26.12.2011 and 031051 dated 25.1.2012 issued by the third respondent Society towards loan accounts SRTO No.74 & SRTO No.81 under the Special Settlement Scheme for Non-Farm Loans of the Cooperative Banks announced vide G.O., in Na.Ka.109979/2010 mavako 3 dated 3.12.2010 and to receive the Loan clearance Certificates in respect of the above loan accounts of the petitioner.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to Demand Not...
- ‹ Prev
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- Next ›
- Last »