Chennai Court July 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.
Sri Semathamman Koil Charitable Trust. Vs. the Secretary to Government ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the first respondent dated 2.2.2011 and made in his G.O.Ms.No.34, Planning, Development and Special Initiatives (S.1) Department and quash the same.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the first respondent dated 2.2.2011 and made in his G.O.Ms.No.34, Planning, Development and Special Initiatives (S.1) Department and quash the same.2. Mr.R.Govindasamy, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.V.Ramajagadeesan, learned counsel takes notice for the third respondent. By consent the writ petition is taken up for disposal.3. This writ petition is sequel to earlier Writ Petition No.7390 of 2012 filed by the very same petitioner. The order dated 28.3.2012 passed in W.P.No.7390 of 2012 by this Court reads as follows:-"Petitioner has come up with th...
M.M.Yusuf. Vs. R.L.Jadhav and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court made in A.S.No.392 of 1987 dated 06.12.2001 reversing the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.5554 of 1981 dated 17.09.1986 on the file of XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree of the I Additional City Civil Court, Chennai made in A.S.No.404 of 1987 dated 06.12.2001 reversing the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.5554 of 1981 dated 17.09.1986 on the file of XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.J U D G M E N T1. S.A.No.1910 of 2004: This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the 1st appellate court in A.S.No.392 of 1987 dated 06.12.2001 in reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial court made in O.S.No.5554 of 1981 dated 17.09.1986 in decreeing the suit.2. S.A.No.1911 of 2004: This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the 1st appellate court in A.S.No.4...
D.Kalaichelvan. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 14.12.2009 bearing CO:IRD:6499:09 and the order of the first respondent dated 09.09.2010 bearing CO:IRD:4630-2010 and consequently directly the respondents to pay all the benefits as if the petitioner retired on 31.10.2009 with all the terminal benefits of Gratuity, Privilege leave encashment etc.,with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date when the amount became payable.O R D E R1. The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the impugned order of the second respondent dated 14.12.2009 vide which punishment of compulsory retirement has been imposed on the petitioner with consequential prayer in the nature of mandamus, directing respondents to pay the petitioner retiral benefits of gratuity, leave encashment ...
V.Periyakaruppan. Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Prayer Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus by forbearing the 6th Respondent from cutting the Kattu Karuvelam Trees grown up at the area belongs to the Revenue Department in Keelaparuthiyur Periya Kanmai, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District and consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to take efficacious steps so as to preserve the protect the said area from illegal acquisition with a view to cut the trees grown up therein.ORDERR.BANUMATHI,J1. In this Public Interest Litigation, Petitioner seeks Writ of Mandamus forbearing the 6th Respondent from cutting Kattu Karuvelam trees in the area belonging to the Revenue Department in Keelaparuthiyur Periya Kanmai, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.2. Survey Number 13 of Keelaparuthiyur tank is having an extent of 141.78.0 Hectares as per revenue records, in which an extent of 51.25.0 Hectares (128 acres) belongs to Forest Department. The remaining portion of Kanma...
Ms.Pan Electronics (India) Ltd. Vs.Ms.State Industries Promotion Corpo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
W.P.No.2515 of 2008 : 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 2nd respondent made in his auction notice Ref I.H.S./SICH/AOD/94 dated 14.12.2007 in so far as it includes the plots allotted to the petitioner on 99 years lease in Plot Numbers A 95, 96, 97, 98, 99 and 100 in SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Hosur, Phase I and quash the same and consequently hand over the above said plots to the petitioner to enable the petitioner to commence and complete the construction of residential houses within a time frame.W.P.No.2516 of 2008 : 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 2nd respondent made in his auction notice Ref I.H.S./SICH/AOD/94 dated 14.12.2007 in so far as it includes the plots allotted to the petitioner on 99 years lease in Plot Numbers A 56, 57, 58...
ian Peter Morris. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Tax Case Appeals against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Chennai, dated 20.06.2005 passed in Cross Objection No. 53/ Mds/ 2000 and I.T.A.No.268/ Mds/ 2000 for the assessment year 1994-95.JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J)1. The assessee has preferred the above appeals as against the common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to assessment year 1994-95 passed in Revenue's appeal as well as in the cross objection filed by the assessee. The Tax Case (Appeal) No. 225 of 2006 was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-"(i) Whether the Tribunal was right in upholding the reassessment made under Section 147 of the Act for the assessment year 1994-95?(ii) Whether the Tribunal was right in sustaining the levy of the interest under Section 234B and C as consequential in nature, when it should have held that there is no liability to advance tax and therefore no liability for interest keeping in mind Section 2...
Rajamanickam Alias KamalabashA. Vs. Sedal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
These civil revision petitions are preferred under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure r/w Section 6 (B) of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955 as against the fair and decreetal orders dated 28.12.2011 and 10.11.2011 passed by the Chairman and Assistant Commissioner, Revenue Court, Cuddalore in CTP Nos.7 and 8 of 2010COMMON ORDER1. The matter was listed on 24.07.2012 and there was no representation on the side of the revision petitioner. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption "for dismissal" on 25.06.2012. Even today, there is no representation on the petitioner's side. However, the learned counsel for the respondent in CRP NPD No.1659 of 2012 is present.2. Hence, both these civil revision petitions are dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed....
Balachandra Reddiyar. Vs. the Deputy Registrar of Co-op. Societies
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, calling for the entire records of the impugned attachment and sale notices issued by the second respondent respectively in R.R.A.No.72/2012-13 dated 23.04.2012, and R.R.A.No.72/2012-13 dated 05.06.2012 and quash the same thereby direct the respondents to extend the time for repayment of loan to the petitioner's loan account in 183/NFS to further date as fixed by this Court.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, calling for the entire records of the impugned attachment and sale notices issued by the second respondent respectively in R.R.A.No.72/2012-13 dated 23.04.2012, and R.R.A.No.72/2012-13 dated 05.06.2012 and quash the same thereby direct the respondents to extend the time for repayment of loan to the petitioner's loan account in 183/NFS to further date as fixed by this Court.2. Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram, learned Special Government Pleader t...
M/S. the Trident Chennai Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Per Ashok Jindal, J. 1. The appellants are in appeal along with stay application and an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. In their application for condonation of delay, it is stated that the impugned order was issued in May 2009 which was despatched through post and might have been received by the appellant in June 2009. But it is the contention of the appellant that they have not received the impugned order. Therefore, they applied for a copy of the order in November 2009 which is well within the extended period of limitation for filing the appeal. But the copy of the order was supplied only in October 2010. Thereafter they filed the appeal within the time. In support of their contention, they have filed an affidavit also. 3. Considering the reasons, stated in the application for condonation of delay, are satisfactory to this Bench, we allow the application for condonation of delay and condone the delay in filing the appeal. 4. In this case the deman...
Sivagurunathan. Vs. S.Shanmugaraja
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-24-2012
Prayer This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 12.09.2011 made in OS.NO.283/2004 by the learned III Additional District Munsif, Tirunelveli.ORDER1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the Plaintiffs against the fair and decreetal order dated 12.09.2011 made in OS.NO.283/2004 by the learned III Additional District Munsif (Trainee District Judge), Tirunelveli, sustaining the objection raised by the Respondent/Defendant and directing the Plaintiffs to pay court fee under Section 40 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 (herein after referred to as the Act).2. The deceased 1st Plaintiff has filed a suit in OS.No.361/2002 on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli for the relief of declaration that the sale deed dated 22.01.2001 executed by the deceased 1st Plaintiff in favour of the Defendant is only in respect of one acre of land described in the plaint schedule property and for consequential perma...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »