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.
Devibala Rosa Bell W/O. S.A. SelestIn Vs. the Deputy Director of Healt ...
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 Mandamus to direct the respondent to pass orders on the charge memo issued to the petitioner in Na.Ka.No.14077/A6/06 on the file of the respondent dated 10.10.2008 as early as possible and further direct the respondent to pass necessary orders for payment of the petitioner's increment dues, uniform allowances and Pongal Bonus by considering the petitioner's representation dated 01.06.2012 by way of legal notice.) ORDER 1. The petitioner has approached this Court, with a prayer for issuance of a Writ, in the nature of Mandamus, to direct the respondent, to expedite the Departmental proceedings initiated on 10.10.2008, and to release the annual increments of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner joined the office of the Deputy Director of Health Services on 26.06.1985, as Multipurpose Health Worker. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 01.12.2006, on contemplated enquiry. Af...
Voltas Limited, Rep by Its Manager Indirect Taxes, Chennai Vs. the Dep ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent herein to forthwith grant to the petitioners a refund of Rs.60,91,483/- in accordance with the directions of the Deputy Commissioner (CT) Appeals, in A.P.No.87/2000 dated 4.4.2003. W.P.No.1586 of 2012: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the files of the respondent herein in TNGST/032394/1993-94 dated 28.12.2011 and quash the same in so far as it relates to the imposition of penalty of Rs.60,91,483/- under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.) COMMON ORDER 1. Since, the issues involved in both the writ petitions are similar in nature, they have been taken up together and a common order is passed. 2. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. 3. It has been stated that the pet...
M/S. Titan Industries Limited (Formerly Known as Titan Watches Ltd.), ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: Tax Case Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal "A" Bench dated 17.02.2006 made in ITA No.621/MDS/1999 and ITA No.230/MDS/2001 relating to the Assessment Year 1997-98.) CHITRA VENKATARAMAN, J. 1. Tax Case No.2200 of 2006 is preferred by the assessee against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 17.02.2006 relating to the Assessment Year 1997-98, raising the following substantial question of law: Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the levy of interest under Section 234B and C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were legally valid while computing the total income under Section 115 JA? 2. The assessee herein is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of watches and jewellery. For the assessment year 1997-98, the assessee filed a return of income admitting nil income, after claiming deduction under Chapter VIA. However, in the return of income filed, which showed an income of Rs.8...
Sai Sankar, Asst. Professor in Music, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai and Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the 4th respondent has no authority to hold or right to be reappointed by the 1st respondent by their proceeding in No.11-9/2012/Akademies, dated 29.06.2012 to the post of Director, Kalakshetra Foundation after demitting the office on 30.04.2012 and after attaining superannuation, against the provisions of the Statutes and Rules relating to her post read with Fundamental Rules and connected service rules applicable to the said post, is illegal, ultra vires and against the fundamentals of the Service Jurisprudence.) ORDER "Kalakshetra" at Adayar, Chennai, was founded with laudable objects by late Tmt.Rukmini Devi Arundale. In order to make the institution as one of national importance, to provide for the establishment and incorporation of a Foundation for its administration, to make provisions for further development of Kalakshetra in accordance with the aims and...
D.J. Rajendran Vs. Dr. K. Kathirvel and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition against the order dated 5.1.2012 in I.A.No.103 of 2009 in I.P.No.63 of 2009 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Salem.) ORDER 1. The second respondent in I.P.No.63 of 2009 on the file of the Sub Court, Salem is the revision petitioner. 2. The first respondent-creditor filed I.P.No.63 of 2009 against the second respondent-debtor and the revision petitioner to adjudicate the second respondent herein as insolvent. In that petition, the first respondent filed I.A.No.103 of 2009 for the appointment of interim receiver under section 20 of the Provincial Insolvency Act and that application was allowed and the Official Receiver, Salem is appointed as Interim Receiver to take immediate possession of the petition mentioned property belonging to the insolvent and that order is challenged in this revision by the second respondent. 3. Learned Senior Counsel Mr.S.V.Jayaraman appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that even according to the petiti...
M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co., Ltd., Vs. Vimala and Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Judgment and decree dated 26.8.2008 made in O.P.No.1461 of 2006 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Cuddalore.) R. Banumathi, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation of Rs.22,61,900/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Cuddalore in M.C.O.P.No.1461 of 2006 for the death of deceased Saravanan in the road traffic accident on 2.3.2006 the appellant Insurance Company has preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts are that on 2.3.2006 at about 8.30 a.m, when deceased Saravanan was traveling as a pillion rider in the TVS Victor motor cycle bearing Regn.No.PY-01-V-8781 driven by one R.Shankar (P.W.2), a lorry bearing Regn.No.TN-30-Y-4789 came in opposite direction on the left side of Cuddalore-Vridhachalmm main road near Thambipettai bus stand. At that time, lorry bearing Regn.No.TN-30-Y-4789 owned by the 7th responde...
M.L. Mallika and Another Vs. the Assistant Engineer, Tami Nadu Electri ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: Writ Petition 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 in his proceedings Lr. No.AE / Oand M / Rangarajapuram / General / D.No.71/11, dated 20.6.2011, quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to provide electricity connection to the petitioners in Shop Nos.E and F, at Old No.25, New No.43, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai-24.) ORDER 1. Heard Mr.M.L.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.P.Gunaraj, learned counsel for the first respondent and Mr.S.R.Raghunathan, learned counsel for the second respondent. 2. The prayer in the Writ Petition is to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, by calling for the records of the first respondent in his proceedings Lr.No.AE/O and M/Rangarajapuram/General/D.No.71/11, dated 26.6.2011, quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to provide electricity connection to the petitioners in Shop...
Kaliappan (Died) and Others Vs. A.K. Somasundaram (Died) and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, against the Judgment and Decree dated 08.11.1996 in A.S.No.124 of 1995 on the file of the Learned Subordinate Judge, Gobichettipalayam, in confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 25.11.1993 in O.S.No.155 of 1992 on the file of the Learned District Munsif's Court, Gobichettipalayam.) 1. The Appellants/Defendants 1 to 3 have preferred the instant Second Appeal as against the Judgment and Decree dated 08.11.1996 in A.S.No.124 of 1995 passed by the Learned Subordinate Judge, Gobichettipalayam, in confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 25.11.1993 in O.S.No.155 of 1992 passed by the Learned District Munsif, Gobichettipalayam. 2. During the pendency of the Second Appeal, the 1st Appellant/1st Defendant expired on 29.06.2001. Upon his death, the Appellants 4 and 5 have been brought on record as Legal Representatives of the deceased 1st Appellant. 3. Likewise, during the pendency of the Second Appeal, 1st Respondent/1st Plai...
R. Vijaya Vs. K. Munusamy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, against the fair and final order dated 05.12.2008 passed in I.A.No.6 of 2007 in RCA No.1 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri.) ORDER 1. Animadverting upon the order dated 05.12.2008 passed in I.A.No.6 of 2007 in RCA No.1 of 2006 by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri, this civil revision petition is focussed. 2. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this revision would run thus: (i) The respondents herein five in number filed RCOP as against the revision petitioner/Vijaya, invoking Section 10(2)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act on the ground of wilful default in paying rent. (ii) The petition was resisted by the tenant. (iii) During enquiry, on the side of the petitioners in RCOP P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.P1 to P13 were marked. The respondent/Vij...
Tvl Sri Jayalakshmi Automobiles, Rep. by Its Proprietor A. Muthu Govin ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2012
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in respect of assessment order of the second respondent in TIN/Year 33714682376/2007-08 dated 25.5.2012 quash the same and to grant any other relief.) 1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents had pointed out that an appeal remedy is available to the petitioner, under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, to challenge the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 25.5.2012. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioner, before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is not maintainable. 3. Even though the petitioner has raised a number of grounds in the present writ petition, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the matter, in vi...