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.
T.ThangappA. Vs. the Junior Engineer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to restore the E.B. Service Connection in S.C.No.1199 at No.4/80, Middle Street, Keelapalur which was disconnected on 04.04.2012 by the first respondent.O R D E R1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on instruction states that the relief sought for in this writ petition becomes infructuous and the writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous. He also made an endorsement to that effect. Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. ...
P.K.Ramasamy. Vs. Vasumathy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the fair and final order dated 28.01.2011 passed in I.A.No.278 of 2010 in O.S.No.199 of 2010 on the file of the Sub Court, Perundurai.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 28.01.2011 passed in I.A.No.278 of 2010 in O.S.No.199 of 2010 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Perundurai., this civil revision petition is focussed.2. At the entertaining stage itself this revision has been heard by this Court.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would detail and delineate the following facts:The suit O.S.No.199 of 2010 was filed by the revision petitioner seeking specific performance of the agreement to sell as against the defendants; whereupon the defendants entered appearance and filed I.A.No.278 of 2010 under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC for rejecting the plaint. After hearing both sides, the lower Court rejected the plaint itself.4. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order of rejection, this revision is focussed.5. This Court raise...
State Bank of IndiA. Vs. G.M.Sanjeevi Naidu.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the judgement and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by the Subordinate Judge (Rent Control Appellate Authority), Ranipet, Vellore District, in R.C.A.No.1 of 1996 partly reversing the order dated 31.10.1995 passed by the District Munsif,(Rent Controller), Arakkonam, Vellore District, in R.C.O.P.No.7 of 1994.ORDER1. Inveighing the judgement and decree dated 22.11.2006 passed by the Subordinate Judge (Rent Control Appellate Authority), Ranipet, Vellore District, in R.C.A.No.1 of 1996 in partly reversing the order dated 31.10.1995 passed by the District Munsif,(Rent Controller), Arakkonam, Vellore District, in R.C.O.P.No.7 of 1994, this civil revision petition is focused.2. The parties, for the sake of convenience, are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the Rent Controller.3. Compendiously and concisely, the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this revision would run thus:(i) The respondent...
Rangasamy Padayachi Vs. Kannan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.183 of 2002 on the file of Additional District Court cum Fast Track, dated 05.11.2003 reversing the judgment and decree dated 07.11.2000 made in O.S.No.553 of 1997 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi.J U D G M E N T1. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the sole respondent is dead and so far, no steps have been taken to bring the legal representatives of the sole respondent, on record. Hence, the second appeal is dismissed as abated. No costs....
Bharath Housing Finance Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to provide sufficient police protection to demolish the petitioner property bearing Old Door No.19, New No.44, Kothari Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600034.O R D E R1. The Learned counsel for the petitioner has made an endorsement that "the petitioner is not pressing the petition".2. Recording the said fact, the present Writ Petition is dismissed as not pressed. No costs. ...
The Managing Director and ors. Vs. R.Rajendran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Writ Appeal No.2189 of 2002 has been filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent as against the order of the learned single Judge dated 15.3.2002 made in W.P.No.16348 of 1995.M.P.No.3 of 2008 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act r/w.Section 151 of C.P.C., praying to condone the delay of 1933 days in filing the Writ Appeal as against the order of the learned single Judge dated 15.3.2002 made in W.P.No.16348 of 1995.COMMON JUDGMENTELIPE DHARMA RAO, J.1. For the sake of convenience and better understanding, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in W.P.No.16348 of 1995.2. The writ petitioner joined the services of the respondent Corporation as Driver on 9.3.1987. On 23.12.1992, when he was on duty in the bus bearing registration No.TN-45N-0018 and when the bus was proceeding from Madurai towards Tiruchirappalli, at about 6.45 pm., one bullock cart was proceeding ahead of the bus near Poolankulathupatti. At the same time, another bus bearing Registration No.TN-45N...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. R.Raja and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Prayer:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree, dated 21.01.2004, made in MCOP No.886 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, FTC-5, Coimbatore at Tiruppur.J U D G M E N T1. The appellant / Insurance Company has filed the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.V, Coimbatore at Tiruppur, in MCOP No.886 of 2001, on 21.01.2004.2. Respondents 1 and 2 herein / claimants have filed the said claim petition for a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for the death of one P.Raja Manickam in a motor accident.3. On the side of the claimants, it is contended that on 24.04.2001 at about 19.30 hrs the deceased P.Raja Manickam was going by walk along his cart from west to east in NH-47 road at Attayampalayam. At that time, a lorry bearing Registration No.TN28 Z 74...
The Managing Director Vs. K.Palanisamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Civil miscellaneous appeal preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 16.12.2004 made in MCOP No.4824/99 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III Judge, Small Causes Court), Chennai.JUDGMENT1. This appeal has been filed against the award and decree passed in MCOP No.4824 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III Judge, Small Causes Court), Chennai, dated 16.12.2004.2. The respondents/claimants have filed the claim petition for compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for the death of their son P.Dakshinamurthy. The case of the respondents/claimants is that on 10.9.1999 at about 9.00 A.M., when the deceased was travelling in the passenger stage carriage bus of the appellant/respondent in O.P., bearing Registration No.TN-01-N-1752, proceeding from Kundrathur to Madhanandhapuram, Chennai and while the stopping of the deceased came, the bus was stopped and he was getting down through the front footboard of th...
The Chairman-cum-managing Director. Vs. the Presiding Officer.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
PRAYER in W.P.No.736 of 2008 : Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of Certiorari to call for the records in I.D.No.417 of 2001 on the file of the first respondent and quash the award dated 5.6.2006.PRAYER in W.P.No.23508 of 2008: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the award made in I.D.No.417 of 2001, dated 5.6.2006 by the first respondent insofar as the denial of back-wages to the petitioner is concerned and quash the same.ORDER1. Both the writ petitions are directed against the same award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai (for short, "the CGIT") in I.D.No.417 of 2001, dated 5.6.2006.2. W.P.No.736 of 2008 is filed by the Management of M/s.Tamil Nadu Magnesite Limited challenging that portion of the award wherein and by which the CGIT granted relief of reinstatement with continuity of service and o...
Cce Trichy and Another Vs. Cethar Vessels (P) Ltd and Another
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2012
Per Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, J. 1. Heard both sides. The appellant-assessee is manufacturing and supplying boiler systems. According to learned advocate, some of the components are manufactured by the assessee whereas some components are bought out items which have been supplied as a part of the contract. They have also collected drawing and design charges from their clients over and above the value of the manufactured and bought out components supplied by them. In both the cases, the department proposed to include the charges as part of the assessable value of the manufactured components and charge duty on the same. 2. In respect of Appeal No.E/467/04, the original authority demanded duty including the entire value of drawing and designing charges. This relates to the period 1990-94. The lower appellate authority has dropped the demand in favour of the assessee leading to this appeal by...
- ‹ Prev
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- Next ›
- Last »