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.
The Managing Director. Vs. S.Amutha and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
PRAYER Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the judgment and decree passed in MCOP NO.479 of 2007, dated 25th day of June 2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Sessions Court (Fast Track Court No.1), Madurai.JUDGMENT 1. The appeal is filed by the Transport Corporation challenging the negligence and quantum of compensation. 2. The deceased Sivankalai aged 40 years, who was employed as Police Constable and earning a sum of Rs.6,605/- per month, died in an accident on 12.05.2006. The legal representatives of the deceased namely the first petitioner as wife and the petitioners 2 to 4 as children and the 5th and 6th petitioners as parents filed a petition claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation. 3. The claim was resisted by the transport corporation on the contention that the death of the deceased was a invited peril and the corporation w...
The Management of Greaves Cotton Ltd. Vs. G.Srinivasan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records connected with the Award dated 03.02.2006 passed by the second respondent in I.D.No.131 of 2004 and to quash the same.O R D E R1. The petitioner challenges the award of the second respondent passed in I.D.No.131 of 2004 dated 03.02.2006.2. The petitioner is a company engaged in the manufacture of Light Diesel Engines in its factory at Sipcot Industrial Estate, Ranipet. The petitioner informs that the first respondent was engaged as an operator in the Engine Assembly which comprises of 12 stages. At each of such stages, an operator fixes the components in the engine resulting in bringing out an assembled engine at the end of the assembly line. The petitioner informs as follows:The conveyor stops for preset intervals and moves from one stage to another. The conveyor is preset to stop for 3= minutes at each stage for fixing of components. There are 6 stop switch...
V.Saravanan. Vs. S.P.M.Sheela and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to withdraw the case in C.C.No.122 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Salem and transfer the same to the Family Court, Salem to try jointly or simultaneously along with FCOP No.5 of 2012 on the file of the Family Court, Salem by allowing this petition.ORDER1. The petitioner is the husband of the 1st respondent. On the complaint made by the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent registered a case in Crime No.7 of 2011 and filed a final report before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Salem for offences under Sections 498-A, 294-B of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.2. The petitioner has filed HMOP.No.27 of 2011 before the Principal Subordinate Court, Perundurai against the 1st respondent for divorce under Section 13(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. On transfer, the same is pending on the file of the Family Court, Salem in FCOP.No.5 of 2012.3. While so...
The Branch Manager. Vs. S.Arokiyasamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award made in MCOP No.244 of 2009 dated 10.02.2012, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pudukottai.JUDGMENT1. The claimant-Arokiyasamy, aged 32 years, who is a welder by profession, and earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month, met with an accident and sustained permanent disability. On consideration of the materials and evidence available on record, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.14,60,757/- with interest at 7.5% p.a., from the date of petition. The details of the compensation are as under:-Rupees Permanent disability 12,96,000/-Pain and suffering 5,000/-Transportation, other medical expenses, extra nourishment etc. 5,000/-Medical expenses as per medical bills 75,979/-Medical expenses for fixation of artificial limb as per Ex.P9 78,778/---------------------Total...... 14,60,757/- ============2. Two Doctors have been examined to speak about the permanen...
Ms.The Tamil Nadu Co-operative. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
PETITION under 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 and Rule 30 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 to revise the order dated 5.10.2005 made in T.A.No.605 of 2000 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Addl. Bench), Chennai for the assessment year 1993-94.O R D E R(Order of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.)This Tax Case (Revision), filed by the assessee as against the order of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to the assessment year 1993-94, was admitted by this Court on the following substantial questions of law:"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, when fresh milk was converted into processed milk such as toned milk, standardized milk, skimmed milk and pasturised milk, is the Tribunal right in holding that there is no manufacture involved therein?2. Whether the mere use of the generic term of 'milk' will result in 'no manufacture', and the milk purchased and the processed milk sold will resul...
M.Rathnavelu. Vs. the Commissioner and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from acquiring the land at No.25, Barathi Nagar, 3rd Street, Uppilipalayam Post, Coimbatore -15 in an unlawful manner.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from acquiring the land at No.25, Barathi Nagar, 3rd Street, Uppilipalayam Post, Coimbatore -15 in an unlawful manner.2. Mr.K.Makesh, learned counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent the writ petition is taken up for disposal.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents should not acquire the petitioner's land without following the due process of law. A representation dated 26.6.2012 has been sent and the postal acknowledgment dated 28.6.2012 signed by the second respondent is produced before this Court today.4. The counsel appearing for the respondents states that the authority will verify the claim of the pet...
Chief General Manager and ors. Vs. S. Arunachalam and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 1st Respondent dated 3.2.2005, order of the 2nd respondent bearing No.A&R/08 dated 13.5.2004 and the order of the 3rd respondent dated 25.11.2003 and quash the same as arbitrary, contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with full backwages, continuity of service and all other attendant benefits.COMMON JUDGMENTELIPE DHARMA RAO, J1. The facts pertaining to the Writ Petition are as follows :-The petitioner joined the respondent Bank as a clerk and subsequently got promoted as Officer. During March, 2002, while he was working in Sankaranainar Kovil Branch, he was placed under suspension by order dated 19.3.2002 alleging certain irregularities. On 18.2.2003, a charge memo was issued to the effect that the petitioner had sanctioned PMRY loans to ineligible persons, disbursed loans to persons ...
Union of India Owning Southern Railway. Vs. Rajesh Damani.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 3.08.2009 made in I.A.No.2096 of 2009 in O.S.No.6112 of 2003 on the file of the XVII Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai.ORDER1. The Revision petitioners are the defendants in O.S.No.6112 of 2003 on the file of the 17th Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai. They are aggrieved against the condition imposed in the order passed by the Court below in I.A.No.2096 of 2009 dated 3.8.2009 wherein and whereby their application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC read with Section 151 CPC was allowed subject to the condition that the petitioners should deposit a sum of Rs.One lakh on or before 4.9.2009.2. The short facts for deciding the issue in this Civil Revision Petition are as follows:- The respondent herein filed the said suit against the petitioners herein for declaration and for payment of certain sums. The said suit came to be filed before the Court below on 16.7.2003. On receipt of the notice from the Court, t...
The State of Tamil Nadu. Vs. All India Council for Technical Education ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the proceedings of the first respondent herein in respect of the impugned regulations in Chapter VI in Appendix I in Clause 1.1 of the Approval Process Hand Book 2011-2012 and to quash the same.ORDER1. It is rather unfortunate that the State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department, should come up with a writ petition of this nature. In this writ petition, they sought to challenge the regulations framed by the All India Council for Technical Education (for short AICTE) in prescribing minimum norms for admission into engineering courses and they wanted to lower the marks further.2. The AICTE by its communication, dated 11.7.2011 had informed that entry level qualification for under graduate programs approved by the Council was reviewed in its executive committee meeting held o...
P.Kennedy. Vs. the Secretary and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records passed by the third respondent in proceeding No.Se.Mu.Aa.No.13160/A1/2011 dated 5.12.2011 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to renew the permit for the petitioner's vehicle Mini Bus bearing Registration No.TN 23 Y 9927 plying on the route Sirkali Thadalan Stop to Kunnam.O R D E R1. Mr.S.Navaneethan, the learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.2. Though the prayer is for a larger relief, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if this Court is pleased to set aside the impugned proceedings of the third respondent, dated 5.12.2011, and if the petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh application for the renewal of Mini Bus permit in question, before the third respondent, and if the third respondent is directed to consider the same and p...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »