Chennai Court June 2012 Judgments
All India Council for Technical Education. Vs. Sun College of Engineer ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
JUDGMENTB. RAJENDRAN, J1. The writ appellants, aggrieved against the order dated 17.05.2012, have come forward with this Writ Appeal.2. The respondent has filed a writ of mandamus directing the first appellant to consider the respondent's applications dated 11.04.2012 and 18.04.2012 for extension of approval of petition mentioned courses for the academic year 2012-2013 without reference to Clause 3(1)(d) of Chapter II of the Approval Process Handbook (2012-2013), paragraphs 4 and 5 of the notifications vide No.1-MS/2012, dated 31.03.2012 and vide No.2-MS/2012, dated 12.04.2012 issued by the first appellant.3. According to the respondent, they are running the college as per the approval originally granted way back in the year 1999-2000. Thereafter, every year, the approval has to be renewed. Subsequently, the renewal has been done upto 2008. In the year 2009, there was an enquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation (in short CBI) in regard to the very approval originally granted stat...
Tag this Judgment!Mohideen Abdul Khader Vs. Ms Precious Carrying Corporation (P) Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease & Rent Control) Act to set aside the decree and judgment dated 06.02.2008 in R.C.A.No.348 of 2005 passed by the Learned Appellate Authority namely VIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai confirming the order and decree dated 10.07.2003 made in R.C.O.P.No.1680 of 2003 passed by the Learned XIV Judge Small Causes Court, Chennai and allow the Civil Revision Petition and order eviction of the respondents herein.ORDER1. The Revision Petitioners are the landlords. The Revision Petitioners filed the above petition for eviction of the respondents on the ground of owners occupation and Act of Waste.2. The case of the revision petitioners / landlords was that they purchased the property under a registered Sale Deed, dated 05.02.1999 with an intention of utilizing the property for the business purpose of the 2nd petitioner and son of the 1st and 3rd petitioners and Thiru.Mohideen Abdul Khader, who is the son of th...
Tag this Judgment!N.R.Sankara Narayanan Vs. R.Manoharan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C., against the judgment of acquittal dated 28.10.2003, made in C.C.No.24 of 1999 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate's Court No.VII, Coimbatore.J U D G M E N T1. The criminal appeal arises out of the judgment of acquittal dated 28.10.2003, made in C.C.No.24 of 1999 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate's Court No.VII, Coimbatore.2. The appellant herein as a complainant filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. stating that when the appellant herein as a Trustee of the Karuppanna Nadar Trust, filed a Trust O.P.No.233 of 1995 before the First Additional District Court, Coimbatore, seeking permission for alienating the trust property and the respondent/accused herein had filed an application in I.A.No.218 of 1998 to implead himself as a party in that proceedings and he had specifically mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of that application, the appellant/complainant is an habitual offender and he sold the prop...
Tag this Judgment!Kamalambal and ors. Vs. Bala and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Prayer: This second Appeal is filed under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.1 of 2001 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruvannamalai, dated 16.03.2006 confirming the decree and judgment passed in O.S.No.1107 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif, Chengam, dated 09.03.2001.JUDGMENT1. The 3rd defendant and the legal heirs of the 2nd defendant are the appellants. The plaintiffs/respondents 1 to 3 filed the suit in O.S.No.1107 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chengam for partition of their 3/5th share in the suit properties.2. The case of the plaintiffs/respondents 1 to 3 was that the suit properties originally belonged to Narayanaswamy Naidu, the father of the plaintiffs/respondents 1 to 3, the husband of the 4th respondent and the father of the deceased 2nd defendant. The first appellant was the husband of the deceased 2nd defendant and the appellants 2 and 3 are the children of the first appell...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ms. Venkatadhri Constructions
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
T.C.(A).No. 122 of 2003:-Tax Case Appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B Bench, Chennai, dated 1.4.2003 passed in I.T.A.No.1866 /Mds/ 2000 for the assessment year 1993-94.T.C.(A).Nos. 1430 and 1431 of 2005:-Tax Case Appeals against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, Chennai, dated 9.5.2005 passed in I.T.A.Nos.575 and 601/Mds/ 2001 for the assessment year 1995-96.COMMON JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J)1. The Revenue has filed the above appeals as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment years 1993-94 and 1995-96. The T.C.(A).No. 122 of 2003 was admitted on the following substantial question of law:-"Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that payment of cash amounting to Rs.3,80,083/- by the assessee to the supplier's bank account is not a violation of the provisions of Section 40A(3)?"The T.C.(A).Nos. 1430 and 1431 of 2005 were...
Tag this Judgment!C.S.M.S.Sivabaggiammal(Died) Vs. C.S.M.S.Lakshmi Narayanan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 30.11.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge and Fast Track Court-IV, Coimbatore at Tirupur in I.A.No.1296 of 2010 in O.S.No.422 of 2005.Civil miscellaneous appeal filed against the order dated 30.11.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge and Fast Track Court-IV, Coimbatore at Tirupur in I.A.No.1297 of 2010 in O.S.No.422 of 2005.COMMON ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 30.11.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge and Fast Track Court-IV, Coimbatore at Tirupur, in I.A.Nos.1296 of 2010 and 1297 of 2010 in O.S.No.422 of 2005 these civil revision petition and the civil miscellaneous appeals have been filed.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 germane facts in a few broad strokes can be encapsulated thus:Sivabaggiammal (since died), Amirthagowr...
Tag this Judgment!Murugappa Goundar. Vs. S.Parameswaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
PRAYER : This Contempt Petition filed under section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 70/71 to punish the respondents herein for their willful disobedience of the order of this Court, dated 03.02.2010 in W.P.No.6603 of 2009.O R D E R1. This petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the order and direction issued by this Court dated 03.02.2010 in W.P.No.6603 of 2009.2. The petitioner herein is the second respondent in the writ petition and the first respondent herein is the writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed for issuance of a writ of Certiorari, to quash the order passed by the second respondent herein dated 16.03.2009, insofar as the lands comprised in survey No.250/1 and 250/2B, Palankarai Village, Avinasi Taluk in patta Nos.77 & 1516. By the said order dated 16.03.2009, the Tashildar, Avinashi, deleted all the names, which were included by earlier orders and restored the original patta.3. The case of the first respondent/writ petitioner was that he had purcha...
Tag this Judgment!Ms.Dhaya College of Engineering Vs. the Secretary to Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
PRAYERAppeal is field under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 19.06.2012 passed in W.P.(MD)No.7525 of 2012.COMMON JUDGMENTR.BANUMATHI, J. AND B.RAJENDRAN, J.1. By consent of the parties at the admission stage itself the writ appeal is taken up for final disposal along with the application in M.P.(MD)No.5 of 2012 in W.A.No.1517 of 2011 as the matter pertains to the application is also the same as in the Writ Appeal.2. According to the appellant, the appellant had obtained necessary permission from the All India Council for Technical Education (in short 'AICTE') for starting a Engineering College and approached the University for grant of affiliation and the Inspection Committee of the petitioner University, made an inspection and submitted a report dated 22.07.2011 and pointed out the following three deficiencies viz.,(a) There is a shortage of 175 library books in Science and Humanities; (b) Location of the cafeteria is by the side of the Class Rooms which may cre...
Tag this Judgment!Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation. Vs. S.Selvaraj
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
PrayerCivil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 03.07.2007 in M.C.O.P.No.69 of 2003 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Sub-Court), Tuticorin.JUDGMENTR.BANUMATHI,J.1. Being aggrieved with the quantum of compensation of Rs.15,45,000/- awarded to the Claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident on 07.02.2002, Appellant-Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation has preferred this appeal.2. Brief facts are that the Respondent-Claimant is a qualified Master of Foreign going Ship and he is authorised to drive all kinds of Ships in Merchant Navy. Claimant is also stated to be engaged in survey and allied works in Tuticorin. He was also doing contract Pilot work with Tuticorin Port Trust. On 7.2.2002, the Claimant attended Tuticorin Port Trust Pilot work and after his return from the Port Trust, he went in his motorcycle bearing registration No.TM-69 D 1416 to distribute wedding invita...
Tag this Judgment!P.Jayaprakash Vs. the Regional Transport Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent in Fwpg;ghiz vz;/63206/c1/96 dated 14.11.2011 demanding tax in respect of the petitioner's vehicle TAS No.5315 and quash the same.ORDER1. This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the impugned order of the respondent in Fwpg;ghiz vz;/63206/c1/96 dated 14.11.2011 demanding tax in respect of the petitioner's vehicle TAS No.5315.2. Facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are thus: 2.1. The petitioner was a contract carriage operator operating an Omni Bus in respect of the vehicle TAS 5315 to ply in Trichy District alone. The said permit was valid upto 25.04.1999. As there was a major repair in respect of the vehicle, the petitioner sent a stoppage report on 31.07.1996 along with Registration Certificate and Insurance Certificate of the vehicle. In Column 6 of the stoppage report, the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »