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.
T.Srinivasan Vs. Shreyash Bhupendra Bhai Kevat
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Fair and Decreetal orders dated 21.06.2006 made in M.C.O.P.No.354 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (II Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai.JUDGMENT1. The injured in an road accident, who was the claimant, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, is the appellant.2. Before the Tribunal, under several heads, totally Rs.10,00,000/- had been claimed. The Tribunal has awarded him Rs.4,32,240/- as total compensation.3. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal, has not taken into account several relevant aspects, not awarded any amount towards transportation charges and a lesser amount has been awarded for expenses towards extra-nourishment. Although the disability has been arrived at 60% and 30%, it had awarded only Rs.80,000/-. No amount was awarded towards loss of future earning power and for loss of earning during his period of tre...
G.Pitchai Pillai Vs. the Revenue Divisional Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
PRAYER:This petition came to be numbered by transfer of O.A.No. 8000of 2001 from the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.A2/2553/2000 dated 30.11.2001 and direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with all other consequential benefits.O R D E R1. The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order of punishment of removal from service.2. It is not disputed that the departmental enquiry under Rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules was held against the petitioner. The petitioner participated in the enquiry, but did not lead any evidence.3. The enquiry officer on the basis of oral and documentary evidence on record, held the petitioner guilty of charges. The competent authority agree with the enquiry officer imposed the punishment of removal from s...
Mr.Hariharasudhan Vs. Mr.T.K.Kameswaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 29.3.2011 passed by the III Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in RCA.No.1340 of 2004 confirming the order dated 27.9.2004 passed by the XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, in R.C.O.P.No.1653 of 2001.ORDER1. Inveighing the order dated 29.3.2011 passed by the III Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, in RCA.No.1340 of 2004 confirming the order dated 27.9.2004 passed by the XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, in R.C.O.P.No.1653 of 2001, this civil revision petition is focused.2. Heard both sides.3. The parties, for the sake of convenience, are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.4. A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision would run thus:(i) The respondent/landlord fled the R.C.O.P.seeking eviction of the revision petitioner/tenant from their occupation of a non-reside...
G.Ramamoorthy Vs. the Secretary to Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to forbear the second respondent herein from proceeding further on the basis of the complaint given by the fourth respondent before the Anti Land Grab Cell, Coimbatore constituted by the first respondent in G.O.(Ms)No.423, Home (Pol-XI) Department, dated 28.7.2011ORDER1. The petitioner in this writ petition seeks to forestall the criminal case being registered against him on a complaint given by the fourth respondent who is none other than his widowed sister-in-law. There has been series of litigation between the petitioner and the fourth respondent in civil courts, being O.S.No.371 of 2000 before the Sub Court, Coimbatore, O.S.No.1707 of 2000 before the Sub Court, Coimbatore, O.S.No.453 of 2005 before the Additional District Court, Coimbatore and C.R.P.No.803 of 2009 before the High Court, Madras. There was also civil litigation between the petitioner and one M.Sa...
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Tvl. Ganesh Corporation
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
REVISIONS filed before the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal to revise the orders dated 18.1.1996, 29.1.1996, 18.12.1996 made in T.A.Nos.308/1995, 1005/94, 166/95, 308/95 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Chennai for the assessment year 1991-92. 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 orders of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (Additional Bench) 18.1.1996, 29.1.1996, 18.12.1996 made in T.A.Nos.308/1995, 1005/94, 166/95, 308/95 relating to the assessment years 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92 1992-93.2. The only question raised in these revisions is whether the assessee is entitled to any benefit of the tax exemption granted in exemption Notification No.II (1)/ CTRE/69/81 dated 3rd January 1951 which reads as under:-"No.II (1) /CTRE/580/81 - In exercise of the powers confer...
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. S.Rajamanickam and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
PRAYER: Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 29.1.2004 made in MACTOP No.130 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Bhavani.J U D G M E N T1. This is insurer s appeal as against the award of total compensation of Rs.8,11,000/- by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Judge), Bhavani.2. The learned counsel would find fault with the order of the Tribunal in holding the lorry driver for the negligence, because the road on which the accident had taken place is wide enough, which suggests contributory negligence on the part of the bike rider.3. According to the learned counsel for the insurer, the Tribunal has adopted the multiplier '18'. While doing so, it had lost sight of the fact that the dependants, who are parents and brother of the deceased, are earning members, and more particularly, the deceased died a bachelor. The learned counsel cited National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shyam Singh and others [2011 SCCL.COM 465] and would subm...
M.Mahalingam Vs. the Chairman
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the entire records in pursuant to the rejection order issued by the 2nd respondent vide letter No.A-1/2886/2010 dated 10.6.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to communicate the reasons for rejecting the highest bid of the petitioner in auction conducted on 21.1.2011 in pursuant to the property described as VR150 S3 Tiruppattur Phase II in the tender published in 'Dinamalar' newspaper dated 21.1.2011.O R D E R1. This Court on 09.3.2012 has passed the following order:-Petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for issuance of writ, in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order rejecting the auction proceedings in favour of the petitioner.2. The Housing Board had invited tenders for sale of commercial plots. The petitioner submitted his tender, and as per the terms of the tender the reserve price of the commer...
S.Sandhya Vs. the Chief General Manager and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to pay to the petitioners, the terminal benefits arising on account of the death of their father.O R D E R1. Daughters of a Sub Divisional Engineer, Transmission Unit, Office of the Director, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., (BSNL), Chennai, claiming themselves as legal heirs, entitled to the terminal benefits, on account of the death of their father, have sought for a Mandamus, directing to the respondents 1 to 3 to pay the same. The 4th respondent is the brother of the deceased, in whose favour, the nomination has been made, by the employee.2. According to the petitioners/daughters, their father expired on 31.03.2002, in harness. The marriage between their parents was dissolved by a decree of divorce in 1989. As per the Hindu Succession Act, they are the Class-I heirs and that even if there was any dissolution of marriage between the parents, ...
M.S.Mani Vs. V.Ramalingam, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-09-2012
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC. as against the judgment and decree, dated 01.12.2006, passed by the Sub-Court, Vellore, in A.S. No.30 of 2006, reversing the judgment and decree, dated 19.01.2006, passed in O.S.No.329 of 1996, by the Principal District Munsif, Vellore.J U D G M E N T1. The present second appeal has been brought by the second defendant, aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore, in A.S.No.30 of 2006, dated 01.12.2006, in and by which, the judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal District Munsif, Vellore, in O.S.No.329 of 1996, dated 19.01.2006, was reversed.2. This Court, at the time of entertaining the second appeal, framed the following substantial questions of law;-"(i) Whether the lower appellate Court is correct in law in holding that the father of the appellant is competent to enter into an agreement of sale even though the property was purchased by his wife under Ex.B1, sale deed, dated 07.01.1949, ...
M.Thiagarajan Vs. Industrial Development Bank of India, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-04-2012
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records and minutes of the meeting of the 2nd respondent held on 16.12.2009 and the consequential order Ref:IDBI/5483/KMS/WD/PAPL/09-10, dated 15.2.2010 passed by the first respondent and quash the same. K.CHANDRU, J.ORDER1. The petitioner has come forward to challenge the minutes of meeting of the second respondent, Industrial Development Bank of India Ltd., Redressal Committee, dated 16.12.2009 and the consequential order of the first respondent, i.e., Industrial Development Bank of India (for short IDBI), dated 15.2.2010.2. The impugned order dated 15.02.2010 came to be passed pursuant to the petitioner moving this court with W.P.No.13178 of 2009, dated 27.8.2009. By the aforesaid writ petition, the petitioner company, i.e., M/s.Paramount Airways Pvt. Limited, of which the petitioner is the Chairman and Managing Director, has sought to set...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »