Chennai Court June 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.
N.Jayaraman Vs. V.Selvaraj
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-27-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 20.9.011 passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Cuddalore, in E.A.No.9 of 2010 in E.P.No.8 of 2005 in O.S.No.13 of 2003.ORDER1. Inveighing the order dated 20.9.011 passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Cuddalore, in E.A.No.9 of 2010 in E.P.No.8 of 2005 in O.S.No.13 of 2003, this revision petition has been filed.2. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts in a few broad stroke could succinctly and precisely be set out thus:The revision petitioner herein, as judgement debtor, in the E.P., filed the application under Order XXI Rule 90 of C.P.C. to get the auction sale set aside. After hearing both sides, the Fast Track Court Judge concerned dismissed the said application.3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, this civil revision petition is focussed.4. At the hearing, when I raised the query as to how the revision would lie when Order XLII...
C.Selvakumar Thilagaraj Vs. the Chairman
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
PRAYERPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent vide his letter No.AIVD/532/06-07, dated 04.11.2006 and quash the same as devoid of merits and direct the respondents to continue to pay the salary of the petitioner with all increments.ORDER1. The petitioner was employed as Assistant Manager during 1998 in Reddiarpatti Branch in Tirunelveli District. He was on leave from 15.05.1998 to 25.05.1998 while he was transferred by an order dated 15.05.1998 from Reddiarpatti Branch to Edayankulam Branch.2.On 15.05.1998, the Manager relieved him from Reddiarpatti Branch by making entry in the Attendance Register. After expiry of the medical leave, since he was relieved from the Reddiyarpatti Branch, he joined at the transferred place.3.Further, while he was working in Reddiyarpatti Branch, he made a note in the tour diary on 06.04.1998 stating that he would be on leave...
R.Sivanarayanan and ors. Vs. the District Collector
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records in pursuant to the impugned termination orders passed by the third respondent in his Proceedings dated 09.04.2007 and the consequential order dated 05.06.2007 and quash these orders and consequently to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with full backwages and other consequential service benefits in the post of Clerk in Panaikudi Panchayat, Narikudi Panchayat Union, Virudhunagar District.ORDER1. The original petitioner is no more. He died during the pendency of the writ petition. His legal heirs are brought on record as the second petitioner to sixth petitioner. The first petitioner, i.e., the original petitioner, was appointed as Clerk on 01.12.1998 under the third respondent-Panchayat. He was terminated from service in blatant violation of the principles of natural justice. He was placed under suspension by order dated...
A.Danabalan Vs. the Secretary to Government and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the third respondent passed in Memo No.24175/E3/99, dated 22.12.2004, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to revise the basic pay of the petitioner in accordance with pay revision in G.O.Ms.No.511, 567 Finance, of the first respondent, dated 01.08.1992 and on par with the Electrician Grade I in the Public Works Department.O R D E R1. The petitioner seeks a direction of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order of the third respondent passed in Memo No.24175/E3/99, dated 22.12.2004 and to consequently direct the respondents to revise the basic pay of the petitioner in accordance with pay revision in G.O.Ms.No.511, 567 Finance, of the first respondent, dated 01.08.1992.2. The petitioner joined as Electrician in the office of the third respondent on 21.12.1977. His initial app...
S.Rajamani Vs. the Deputy Commissioner of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent passed in 'F' order dated 26.02.2005 in P.R.No.267/2004, which was confirmed by the second respondent in his proceedings C.No.D2(1)20044/2005 dated 08.04.2005 and the proceedings of the third respondent in R.C.No.96517/AP2(3)/2005, dated 08.06.2005 and proceedings of the fourth respondent in R.C.No.183215/AP2(3)/2005, dated 25.09.2005 and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service together with backwages and other attended and consequential benefits.O R D E R1. This petitioner challenges the order of the first respondent passed in 'F' order dated 26.02.2005 in P.R.No.267/2004, which was confirmed by the second respondent in his proceedings C.No.D2(1)20044/2005 dated 08.04.2005, the proceedings of the third respondent in R.C.No.96517/AP2(3)/2005, dated 08.06.20...
K.V.Anantha Narayanan Vs. K.G.Radha Krishnan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
This civil revision petition is preferred under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure as against the order dated 06.01.2004 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri in I.A.No.104 of 2003 in unnumbered A.S.... of 2003.ORDER1. Heard both sides.2. Animadverting upon the order dated 06.01.2004 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri in I.A.No.104 of 2003 in unnumbered A.S.... of 2003, this civil revision petition has been focussed.3. The germane facts in a few broad strokes can be encapsulated thus:The respondent No.1- K.G.Radha Krishnan filed the suit in O.S.No.161 of 1990 as against three defendants viz., the two revision petitioners herein and R2-Natarajan. After contest, the trial court decreed the suit awarding compensation in a sum of Rs.2 lakhs. Since pendente lite interest as well as post decreetal interest was not awarded, the plaintiff himself preferred appeal in A.S.No.44 of 2002 for the limited purpose of getting such interest referred ...
Ms.Eid Parry (India) Limited Vs. the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
PRAYER: Tax Case Appeal Nos.1311 and 1312 of 2005 is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Chennai dated 29.03.2005 made in I.T.A.Nos.209 and 210(Mds)/1999.JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.)1. The assessee is on appeal as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in respect of the assessment year 1994-95 and 1995-96. The following are the substantial questions of law raised in the Tax Case Appeal filed by the assessee T.C.(A) No.1311 of 2005:(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the investment allowance cannot be carried forward? and(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that as per the Explanation 2 to Clause (c) of Section 43(6), the unabsorbed depreciation of FGCL - Amalgamating Company cannot be a...
S.Gnanavel Vs. the Principal,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
Prayer : Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records and to quash the first respondent order herein proceeding no. and date nil and direct the first respondent to admit the petitioner's daughter in L.K.G in the first respondent School.O R D E R 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, seeking to challenge the action of the first respondent school in denying admission to his daughter on the ground that there is lack of space in the school for admission. The petitioner, invoking the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009, has filed the present writ petition.2. The contention raised by the petitioner was that the action of the school Management was arbitrary and they applied discrimination against his daughter, which violates Article 17 of the Constitution of India.3. When the matter came up for admission on 30.5.2012, this court ordered notice and privat...
New Venkateswara Saw Mill Vs. the Principal Chief Conservator of Fores ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
Writ Petition No.16226 of 2012 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in pursuance of the notice in Ref Na.Ka.No.220/2012 dated 05.06.2012 issued by the third respondent and quash the same with a direction, directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application under Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 and issue licence to petitioner's Sawmill.Writ Petition No.16227 of 2012 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in pursuance of the notice in Ref Na.Ka.No.220/2012 dated June 2012 issued by the third respondent and quash the same with a direction, directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application under Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 and issue licence to petitioner's Sawmill.COMMON ORDER1. Wr...
V.Kanagaraj Vs. Ramasamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-26-2012
PrayerWrit Appeal in W.A.(MD) No.394 of 2008 is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the Order dated 10.04.2008 made in W.P.(MD) No.2494 of 2008 on the file of this Court.JUDGMENTR.BANUMATHI,J.1. The Writ Appeal is preferred against the Order dated 10.04.2008 made in W.P.(MD)No.2494 of 2008, whereby the learned judge dismissed the writ petition and declined to issue writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the appellant's representation dated 23.2.2008 and also declining to issue further directions.2. The 1st respondent Society was registered under the Societies Registration Act. The society is established for the benefit of Sithurajapuram Melur Kammavar Uravinmurai Naidus. K.K.S.Middle School is administered by the Society. There is a checkered history of litigations regarding the Society and the administration of the School. Earlier, regarding appointment of Headmaster of the School, differences arose between R.Vellaichamy, son of 1st respondent on one...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »