Chennai Court August 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.
Annai Indira Memorial College of Education, Rep. by Its Correspondent ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in respect of the impugned order issued by the 2nd respondent vide its proceedings in F.No.SRCAPP718 (2012-13) D.A.Ed (PA)/TN/2011-12/39274 dated 15.03.2012 and quash the same and direct the respondents especially the 2nd respondent to process the application of the petitioner dated 28.09.2011 submitted through online on 26.09.2011 by considering the compliance report of the petitioner dated 25.01.2012 for the grant of recognition to the petitioner institute for conducting B.Ed., degree course (Bachelor of Education) from the academic year 2012-13 within a time frame which may be fixed by this Court. ORDER The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is an appealable under Section 18 of National Council for Teacher Education Act. Therefore, he prays of liberty of this Court to withdraw the writ petition to avail ...
S.P.N. Sathyamoorthy and Another Vs. M.C. Swaminathan Chettiar and Oth ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: Civil revision petitions filed to set aside the return of the petition in unnumbered E.A.No.........of 2012 in E.P.No.42 of 2010 in O.S.No.1334 of 1990 and as against the order dated 3.2.2007 passed by the Principal Sub Judge, Coimbatore, in I.A.No.917 of 2006 in I.A.No.212 of 2006 in O.S.No.1334 of 1990, respectively.) Common Order: 1. Animadverting upon the return of the petition in unnumbered E.A.No.........of 2012 in E.P.No.42 of 2010 in O.S.No.1334 of 1990 and the order dated 3.2.2007 passed by the Principal Sub Judge, Coimbatore, in I.A.No.917 of 2006 in I.A.No.212 of 2006 in O.S.No.1334 of 1990, respectively, these civil revision petitions are filed. 2. The parties, for the sake of convenience are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court. 3. A thumbnail sketch of the germane facts in a few broad strokes can be encapsulated thus: (i) M.C.Swaminathan Chettiar-the first respondent herein filed the suit O.S.No.1334 of 199...
M/S. L.S.K. Traders Rep. by Its Proprietor A.L. Pathy Vs. the Commissi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd respondents herein to Release the goods viz. 115 units of Used Multifunction Devices, imported vide Bill of Entry No.7519495 dated 28.7.2012 under free as Second hand capital goods in terms of para 2.17 read with definitions under 9.12 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14 without imposing any restriction in the absence of specific restriction in para 2.17 of Foreign Trade Policy and in para 2.33 of the Handbook of Procedures 2009-14 and any notification.) 1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that this Court had passed an order, dated 27.2.2012, in a batch of writ petitions, in W.P.No.21732 of 2011, etc., (batch), dealing with similar issues, as in the present case, and had ordered the rel...
Anitha Alfred Vs. K. Alfred
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act and Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act against the Order dated 01.08.2010 made in I.D.O.P.No.3962 of 2009 on the file of I Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai) R. BANUMATHI, J. 1. This appeal arises out of the order in I.D.O.P.No.3962 of 2009 (01.8.2010) allowing the divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband and dissolving the marriage between the appellant-wife and the respondent-husband solemnized on 10.07.1989. 2. Brief facts are :- Appellant and the respondent got married on 10.7.1989. The marriage was love marriage and appellant-wife converted into Christianity before the marriage. Out of the wedlock, a daughter by name Darren and son by name Steen Jack were born on 13.07.1992 and 29.11.1996 respectively. Respondent got the job as seamen. Out of the earnings, Respondent is said to have purchased a Flat at New No.34/2 (Old No.109/2), East Vanniyar street, Best Apartments, K.K.Nagar (West)...
V. Isabella Vs. the General Manager, Tamil Nadu Government State Expre ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent's proceedings in Lr.No.048912/Y10/PF/SETC 2011 dated 05.11.2011 and quash the same consequently directing the respondents herein to sanction the family pension to the petitioner on account of the death of her husband namely Issac John.) 1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a Writ, in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order Letter No.048912/Y10/PF/SETC - 2011 dated 05.11.2011, in declining the family pension to the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is the wife of Late Isaac John, who was working as a Conductor (EDP.No.2358) in Tamil Nadu State Express Corporation. The husband of the petitioner was discharged after completing 30 years of service. 3. The husband of the petitioner had married Suseela Rani on 10.04.1980, according to the Christian rites and Customs. Because of the misunderstanding between th...
K. Rajendran Vs. the General Manager Tamil Nadu State Transport Corpor ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to sanction pension benefits as per Rule 19 of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Rules and to refund the amount of Rs.12,549/- recovered from the petitioner as notice wages and to settle Rs.7,000/- paid under Employees Retirement Scheme.) ORDER 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to sanction pension under Rule 19 of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Rules and for refund of Rs.12,549/- (Rupees twelve thousand five hundred and forty nine only) recovered from the petitioner as notice wages as also to settle another sum of Rs.7,000/- (Rupees Seven thousand only) paid under Employees Retirement Benefits Scheme. 2. The petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis on 29/10/1998 as Junior Tradesm...
M/S. Karaikal Industries Forum, Represented by Its President, Register ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Common Prayer: Memoranda of Grounds of Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the common order of a learned single Judge of this Court dated 07.03.2012 passed in Writ Petition Nos.5202 to 5205 of 2012.) Common Judgment Chief Justice and T.S.Sivagnanam, J 1. These Appeals are directed against the common Judgment and order in W.P.Nos.5202 to 5205 of 2012, dated 7.3.2012. 2. The writ petitioners are the appellants in these appeals. The appellant in all these appeals is a Society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act 1860 stated to have been founded with the objective to protect the interest of its members who are having industrial units in Karaikal. The matter arises under the Contract Labour (Regulation and abolition) Act 1970 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act.) The prayer in the writ petitions were to quash Notifications issued by the Government of Puducherry in G.O.Ms.No.19, G.O.Ms.No.16, G.O.Ms.No.21 and G.O.Ms.No.18 all dated 24.8....
Allikulam Pazhaiyaporul, Sirukadai Vyabarikal Sangam, Rep by Its Presi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents herein to allocate hawking site for the 165 members of the Petitioner Sangam where they are presently hawking namely near Lillypond Business Complex, Chennai-600 003 and issue such further or appropriate orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsels appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Sangam praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents, to allocate hawking sites for the 165 members of the petitioner Sangam, near the Lillypond Business Complex, Chennai. 3. It has been stated that the petitioner Sangam, having a membership of 165 hawkers, has been registered under the Societies Registration Act, bearing Regn.No.35/91. The members of the petitioner ...
N.C. Anbu Selvam Vs. the District Collector, Madurai District and Othe ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to release the petitioner's Ashok Leyland HGV - Multi Axled Vehicle bearing Registration No.KA01-AC-3333 within the stipulated time.) ORDER 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to release the petitioner's Ashok Leyland HGV - Multi Axled Vehicle bearing Registration No.KA01-AC-3333. 2. The petitioner purchased the vehicle in question from Mr.Venkateswaran for the valuable consideration and got transferred all the relevant documents in his name. 3. The petitioner is using the vehicle for his personal use as well as for rental purpose to third parties. On 12/7/2012, at about 8 p.m., the Deputy Director of Geology, intercepted and seized the vehicle along with the driver on charge of carrying two granite stone without proper ...
R. Dharmichand Kothari Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2012
(Prayer: REFERENCE Application under Section 256(1) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 in I.T.A.No.1755/Mds/1996 for the block assessment years 1986-87 to 1996-97.) Chitra Venkataraman, J. 1. Following are the questions of law referred to this Court under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act: "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the addition of Rs.43,06,458/- warranted as unexplained investment in Gold even though no primary gold was found? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in coming to a conclusion that the applicant has made investment in Gold at any point of time, especially when there were no material or proof to show that such investment was made? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the provisions of Section 132(4A), whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no nexus or proximity between the alleged acquis...