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.
B.Santhi. Vs. the District Collector
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-04-2012
PRAYER:This petition came to be numbered by transfer of O.A.No. 2151 of 2002 from the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the first respondent to reinstate the petitioner in the post of Nutrition Assistant or any other post under the Nutrition Project Scheme in pursuant to the Secretary to Government Social Welfare Department's letter No.3757/Sathi 1.2/97, dated 10.03.1997 with effect from 1.10.2001.O R D E R1. The petitioner was appointed as Nutrition Assistant on 30.09.1992. Subsequently, she was selected by way of direct recruitment on 20.04.1997. In pursuance to her selection, she joined Community Nutrition Centre, Padur Village. The petitioner submitted her resignation to contest the local body election for the post of Panchayat President. The resignation submitted by the petitioner was accepted vide order No.Na.Ka.pa.Vu.1/17756/2001,dated 01.10.2001.2. The petitioner was defeated in the election. After the def...
Habiba Ammal and ors. Vs. Sarkunam and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-04-2012
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.78 of 2001 dated 12.1.2004 on the file of Sub-Court, Thiruvarur confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No.98 of 1996 dated 30.7.2001 on the file of District Munsif Court, Thiruthuraipoondi.J U D G M E N T1. The appellants in the Second Appeal are plaintiffs before the trial court who filed a suit against the defendants/respondents herein for declaration of title and possession with mesne profits and the same having been non-suited by both the Courts below, they have brought this Second Appeal under section 100 C.P.C.2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Second Appeal are as under:(i) The plaintiffs claimed to have purchased the suit property from one Valliappa Chettiar. It is also admitted by both sides that the suit property originally belong to Valliappa Chettiar. Whileso, the plaintiffs/appellants have purchased by sale deed dated 24.12.1980 the land lying adjacent to the suit land w...
B.Sakthi. Vs. the Secretary to Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-04-2012
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent's proceedings in G.O.(D).No.82 Industries (MMCI) dated 14.09.2006 and quash the same and direct the respondents to grant stone quarry lease to the petitioner in S.F.No.1133/1 (part) over extent of 5.00.0 hectares of Pilichi Village, Coimbatore (North) Taluk, Coimbatore District for the period of 5 years.ORDER1. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus in calling for the records of the 1st respondent's Proceedings in G.O.(D).No.82 Industries (MMCI) dated 14.09.2006 and quash the same. Further, the Petitioner has also sought for issuance of direction by this Court to the respondents in granting the stone quarry lease to the petitioner in S.F.No.1133/1 (part) over extent of 5.00.0 hectares of Pilichi Village, Coimbatore (North) Taluk, Coimbatore District for a period of 5 years.2. According to...
R.Ragunathan. Vs. the Secretary to Government and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-04-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from converting the open space area at S.No.285/1, Ramakrishna Nagar, Porur Village, Saidapet Taluk to any other use other than a park and directing the sixth respondent to hand over the maintenance of the OSR land in the aforementioned survey number to ensure that the OSR land is maintained as a lung space free of construction so as to serve posterity and public good.O R D E R1. This writ petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents from converting the open space area at S.No.285/1, Ramakrishna Nagar, Porur Village, Saidapet Taluk to any other use other than as a park.2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the seventh respondent had submitted that further constructions, if any, would be put up in the land in question, ...
Thangaraj. Vs. the Executive Engineer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-04-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the third respondent in Ka.No.,kpbgh-, & g-ehfY}h;-nfh/fl;L A.No.69/10 dated 30.08.2011, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to restore the original position of Service Connection No.159 to the petitioner's common well available in S.No.118/8b Ogaiyur Village, Kallakurichi.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the third respondent in Ka.No.,kpbgh-, & A.No.69/10 dated 30.08.2011, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to restore the original position of Service Connection No.159 to the petitioner's common well available in S.No.118/8b Ogaiyur Village, Kallakurichi.2. Mr.G.Vasudevan, learned standing counsel appearing for the electricity board takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. In view of the order that i...
Vtm Limited. Vs. the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-04-2012
Prayer: Appeal filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal "C" Bench, dated 19.5.2005, in ITA No.1030/Mds/2001 under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1996-97.JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.)1. The assessee is on appeal as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal raising the following substantial question of law relating to the assessment year 1996-1997:-" Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for getting a consultant report for the purpose of improvement of its products is neither allowable under 37 nor under section 35D ?2. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee placed reliance on the order of this Court in Tax Case (Appeal) No.992 of 2004 dated 7.6.2011, in respect of the very same assessee, raising an identical question as to whether the expenditure incurred for the purpose of improve...
Balarama Naicker. Vs. Lakshmi.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-04-2012
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC. as against the judgment and decree, dated 27.08.2004, passed by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Chengalpattu, in A.S.No.29 of 2004, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 24.02.2004, passed in O.S.No.504 of 1996, by the District Munsif, Chengalpattu.J U D G M E N T1. The present second appeal has been filed by the defendants as against the concurrent findings of the Courts below.2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the second appeal are given as under:-The plaintiffs 1 and 2/respondents herein are sister and brother, born to Arumugham and Dhanappaggiammal. The defendant/appellant herein is the son of Kishtappa Naicker, who is the elder brother of Arumugham. The suit property is a poramboke land bearing new S.No.411/5 and old S.No.377/1, and the same was encroached by one Arumugham, the plaintiffs' father and for which, 'B' memo was issued in his favour, which proves the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs' father. After the death...
Jagadeesan and ors. Vs. Jayapriya Chit Funds (P) Limited.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-04-2012
This civil revision petition is preferred under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code as against the order of attachment of salary dated 24.02.2012 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli in E.P.No.276 of 2012 in A.R.No.50 of 2010.ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.2. This civil revision petition is focussed as against the order of attachment of salary dated 24.02.2012 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli in E.P.No.276 of 2012 in A.R.No.50 of 2010.3. The germane facts can be encapsulated thus:The court below in the Execution Petition ordered attachment for recovering a total sum of Rs.52,672/- and in that connection, recoveries have been effected from the salary of the petitioners.3. The grievance of the judgment debtors is that despite the aforesaid amount having been recovered, the officer concerned is going on recovering further amounts without any stoppage. As such, the gri...
- ‹ Prev
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- Next ›