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.
The Divisional Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Jun-19-2012
(The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying for certain direction. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dt.4.5.2011 in CC. No.178/2007. This petition coming before us for hearing finally today. Upon hearing the arguments of the counsel on either side, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order in the open court:) JUSTICE R. REGUPATHI, PRESIDENT (Open court) 1. The opposite parties are the appellant. 2. Since the District Forum allowed the complaint against the opposite parties, for the repudiation of the claim on the basis of the invalid driving license by invoking provision under Sec.14 of the Motor Vehicle Act, by construing that as per the provisions, by taking into consideration of the age of the license holder, it could be ...
G.Kannan. Vs. the Commissioner of Employment
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
This writ petition is 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 respondents, especially the Charge Memo issued by the 3rd respondent relating to his proceedings made in Mandanam/E.E.Tho.Aaa/8/2002, dated 25.11.2002 and quash the same as null and void, illegal and invalid and consequently directing the respondents especially the 2nd respondent to promote the petitioner as Record Clerk on par with his immediate junior placing the petitioner's name at the appropriate place in the panel of Record Clerks with all service and monetary benefits.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the charge memo, dated 25.11.2002, said to have been issued to the petitioner, by the third respondent.3. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the main contention of ...
A.Kamalakannan Vs. the Secretary to Government(Housing), and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the first respondent relating to G.O.(2T) No.68, dated 27.07.2006 and to quash the same and order restoration of G.O.(2T) No.5, dated 19.01.2005 in favour of the Petitioner.O R D E R1. The Petitioner has filed the Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus in calling for the records on the file of the first Respondent pertaining to G.O.(2T) No.68, dated 27.07.2006 and to quash the same. Further the Petitioner has sought for issuance of restoration Order of G.O.(2T) No.5, dated 19.01.2005.2. According to the Petitioner, the first Respondent/The Secretary to Government (Housing), Secretariat, Madras passed an order in G.O.(2T) No.5, dated 19.01.2005 by allotting Cement Godown in Sathuvachari Phase-I, (by converting the Cement Godown as house site) to the Petitioner. Even before passing the said order, the said land was kept for future schem...
G.Anandan Vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section of 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 20.02.2004, made in S.C.No.670 of 2003 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Court, City Civil Court, Chennai.J U D G M E N T1. The criminal appeal arises out of judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 20.02.2004, made in S.C.No.670 of 2003, on the file of the First Additional Sessions Court, City Civil Court, Chennai, whereby the accused A3 was convicted for the offence under Section 397 read with 392 IPC and sentenced him to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs.3,000/- in default in payment to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. A4 and A5 were convicted for the offences under Sections 392 IPC and sentenced them to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment each and imposed a fine of Rs.3,000/- each in default in payment to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment each.2. The respondent has filed a final report stating that on 11....
Syed Humayun. Vs. the Collector and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
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 first respondent in Na.Ka.A3/6449/2001 dated 02.3.2002 and quash the same.O R D E R1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the order reverting the petitioner to the post of Tahsildar from the post of Deputy Tahsildar.2. The learned Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, at the time of admission, has stayed the reversion of the petitioner.3. Counter has been filed by the respondents and in paragraph 3 of the counter, it is submitted as under:It is submitted that Thiru Syed Humayun, (the applicant) was initially appointed as Assistant by the T.N.P.S.C. directly and he joined in Kancheepuram District Revenue Unit on 8.12.1986. The Government in their order Ms. No. 133 Revenue Department 7.2.95 have issued amendmen...
M.Kannan and ors.. Vs. Mrs.S.Rajeswari and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
Prayer in Crl.R.C.Nos.154, 155 and 156 of 2006:-Criminal Revisions are filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., against the order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Chennai, dated 28.12.2005, in C.A.No.212 of 2004, C.A.No.211 of 2004 and C.A.No.213 of 2004 respectively, dismissing the appeal and confirming the conviction and sentence of six months simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo one month simple imprisonment under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C.No.457 of 2000, C.C.No.456 of 2000 and C.C.No.5516 of 1999 respectively by the V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, dated 19.05.2004.Prayer in Crl.R.C.Nos.335, 334 and 336 of 2006 :-Criminal Revisions are filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to enhance the sentence passed against the accused herein in and award compensation under Section 357 of Cr.P.C., in the order passed in C.A.No.212 of 2004, C.A.No.211 of 2004 and C.A.No....
P.Mahalingam Vs. the Secretary, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Prohibition, prohibiting the respondents from appointing any other persons other than the Vishwakarma Community as the Trustees or Fit persons to the Arulmighu Drowpathiamman Temple, Kumbakonam Town and Taluk, Thanjavur District.O R D E R1. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner informs this Court that the Writ Petition has become an infructuous one. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the case bundle.2. Recording the said fact, this Court dismisses the Writ Petition as an infructuous one. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. No costs....
Dr.R.Rajan. Vs. the Government of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the Respondents relating to the order of the 1st Respondent in F.2-1/2010-NLM-III/NLM-II dated 17.06.2010 and the orders of the 2nd Respondent in D.O.Letter No.1/SRC/2010 dated 06.07.2010 and proceedings of the Chairman, SRC & Principal Secretary to Government, Department of School Education, Government of Tamil Nadu dated 22.07.2010.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned.2. It has been stated that a notification, dated 16.7.2006, had been issued, by the Tamil Nadu Board of Continuing Education, Chennai, calling for applications for the post of Director, State Resource Centre for Adult Education, Tamil Nadu.3. It has been further stated that the petitioner, who had been functioning, as a Programme Coordinator, had submitted his application for the said post. Based on the interview conducted by the Sele...
Sagunthaladevi Vs. Periyasamy Gounder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
Civil revision petition filed under Section 115 of CPC against the fair and decreetal order passed in E.P.No.5 of 2011 in O.S.No.40 of 2004 dated 16.08.2011 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of the Nilgiris at Udhagamandalam.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 16.08.2011 passed in E.P.No.5 of 2011 in O.S.No.40 of 2004 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Nilgiris at Udhagamandalam, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. The facts as stood uncurtained in this matter could be encapsulated thus:The Executing Court in E.P.No.5 of 2011 ordered delivery as per the decree for specific performance, rejecting the contention of the judgment debtor to the effect that after the execution of the sale deed by the Court as per the specific performance decree the judgment debtor paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) to the decree holder's son-in-law Balasundaram and the matter was settled. Suppressing those facts, the E.P. for delivery is sought to be enfo...
Commissioner of Income Tax. Vs. Shri Renuga Textiles Mills Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-18-2012
Tax Case Appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench dated 28.2.2005 in ITA.No. 2128/Mds/97 for the assessment year 1994-95.JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J)1. The Revenue is on appeal as against the order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to the assessment year 1994-95. Following are the questions of law raised for consideration:-(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the amalgamated company is eligible for the benefit of exemption under Section 10B which was granted to the amalgamating company in respect of an export oriented unit set up by it?(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that development of software is a revenue expenditure and not a capital expenditure?"2. As far as the second question of law involved in development of software is concerned, in the decision reporte...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »