Chennai Court September 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.
S. Krishna Prabu Vs. J. Balaji and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 21.11.2007 in M.C.O.P.No.608 of 2002 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II Court of Small Causes), Chennai.) JUDGMENT R. SUBBIAH, J., Being dissatisfied with the award (21.11.2007) passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai, in M.C.O.P.No.608 of 2002, Claimant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation. 2. Brief facts are as follows: According to the appellant, on 12.03.2001, while he was travelling in a Van bearing registration No.TN-09-S-1950, owned by 1st respondent and insured with 2nd respondent, from Trichy to Chennai from South to North, the said Van was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and it dashed against the front portion of the Government Bus bearing registration No.TN-45-N-1344, which was coming from the opposite direction and thus, caused the accident. In whi...
R. Harikrishnan Vs. Kamalakannan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(Prayer: Appeal filed as against the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2007 passed by the learned VI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in O.S.No.9334 of 2006.) 1. This appeal is focussed at the instance of the unsuccessful plaintiff as against the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2007 passed by the learned VI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in O.S.No.9334 of 2006. 2. For convenience sake, the parties are referred to here under according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court. 3. A thumb-nail sketch of the relevant facts as stood exposited from the plaint would run thus: a] The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance seeking the following reliefs: To pass a decree and judgment against the defendant- - for a direction against the defendant to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff or his nominees in respect of the property, i.e., house, ground n premises bearing Door No.14/50, Ramaswamy Raja Street, Sanrorpalayam, Arumbakkam, ...
M/S. Ideal Dry Mixes (India) Pvt Ltd Rep by Its Manager R. Raghunandan ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of mandamus, directing the 2nd Respondent herein to consider the representation dated 29.06.2012 sent by the petitioner and to return the goods seized by the 2nd respondent on 01.06.2012.) M. JAICHandREN, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2.At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that a criminal case had been filed before the Judicial Magistrate I, Pollachi in Crime No.204/2012 for the offences under Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, read with Rule 36(a) of the Tamil Nadu Mines and Minerals concessions Rules, 1959, and under section 379 I.P.C. Therefore, it is open to the petitioner to move the Magistrate Court concerned, by way ...
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. R. Santhi and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.398 of 2002 dated 08.07.2004 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Fast Track Court No.IV), Poonamallee.) The New India Assurance Company, challenging its liability under the award, had directed this appeal. 2. For the death of 1st respondent's husband, the Claims Tribunal had awarded the claimants totally Rs.2,36,250/-. 3. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company did not dispute the determination of quantum of compensation, but disputes the very basis of grant of compensation viz., death of deceased in a road accident. 4. Mr.Kabirdoss, the learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the deceased was already a known diabetic and an heart patient. He himself walked to the hospital. There was no post-mortem. There was huge delay in lodging the F.I.R. The evidence of R.W.1 shows that the deceased did not die due to the injury sustained ...
The New India Assurance Company Limited Vellore Vs. Thilaga and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(Prayer: These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed against the Judgement and Decree dated 22.4.2003 made in MCOP.Nos.240 and 322/1998 by the learned Principal District Judge (MACT) Vellore.) 1. These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited/4th Respondent before the Tribunal, against the Judgement and Decree dated 22.4.2003 made in MCOP.Nos.240 and 322/1998 by the learned Principal District Judge (MACT) Vellore. 2. Both the claims arise out of the motor accident that had occurred on 20.11.1997, wherein the Van bearing Reg.No.TN-23-B-7273 owned by the 4th Respondent in CMA.No.3327/2003 and the 3rd Respondent before the Tribunal and insured with the Appellant New India Assurance Company Limited collided with the bus bearing Reg.No.TN-27-Z-6565 owned by the 2nd Respondent in CMA.No.3327/2003/1st before the Tribunal and insured with the 3rd Respondent/United India Insurance Company Limited. 3. In MCOP.No.240/1998, as against which CMA.No.3327/ 2003...
S. Sivakumar Vs. the Principal District Judge, Coimbatore and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records in pursuant to the termination order issued by the first respondent in A.No.1/2011 D.No.9442/2011 dated 28.11.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in the post of Office Assistant with back wages and consequential attendant benefits.) 1. This Writ Petition is filed for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in pursuant to the termination order issued by the Principal District Judge, Coimbatore in A.No.1/2011 D.No.9442/2011 dated 28.11.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in the post of Office Assistant with back wages and consequential attendant benefits. 2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows:- The petitioner was appointed by the first Respondent as Masalchi-cum-Night Watchman in Class IV of Tamil Nadu Basi...
G. Sriram and Others Vs. the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Trans ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Award and Decree dated 27.3.2000 passed in M.C.O.P No.3815 of 1996 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Court of Small Causes No.V), Chennai. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Award and Decree dated 27.3.2000 passed in M.C.O.P No.3817 of 1996 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Court of Small Causes No.V), Chennai. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Award and Decree dated 27.3.2000 passed in M.C.O.P No.3862 of 1996 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Court of Small Causes No.V), Chennai.) COMMON JUDGMENT: Since these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arose out of a common road accident and common judgment, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The relevant particulars of the cases are tabulated as under: ad>Sl.No.Name of the claimantM.C.O.P.Nos.Amount awarded by the TribunalC.M.A1G.Sriram3815 of 1996Rs.1,000/-3665/20052V.Nagarathinam3817 of 1996Rs.2,5...
M/S. Metecno (India) Private Ltd, Rep by Its Director M.N. Nagasekar V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the first respondent herein in A.C.A.A.R.42/2012/13 (D.Dis.Acts.Cell II/22568/2012 quash the impugned proceedings, dated 23.07.2012, and further direct the first respondent to grant an "opportunity of being heard" as mandated under Rule 12A(7) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added tax Rules, 2007, before passing the order of classification in order to enable the petitioner to produce such materials before the first respondent and thereafter pass orders in accordance with law.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned Government Advocate for taxes, appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a registered dealer in 'insulating materials' on the files of the third respondent, under the provisions of the Tamilnadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, a...
V. Mohanraj (Partner) License Hotel Muthu, Virudhunagar District and A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. At this stage of the hearing of this writ petition, it had been submitted, on behalf of the respondents, that the impugned order, suspending the licence issued in favour of the petitioner, may be set aside. However, the petitioner may be directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent concerned, pursuant to the notice issued to him, as per the procedures prescribed, under Rule 22(1) of The Tamil Nadu Liquor (Licence and Permit) Rules, 1981. 3. It had been further submitted that the respondent concerned would consider the objections filed by the petitioner, if any, and pass appropriate orders thereon, based on the enquiry, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. It had been further submitted that it would be open to the petitioner to run the bar in question, by following the ...
M/S. Cooline Refrigeration Allieds, Rep by Its Partner-zuber Ahmed and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-04-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the impugned proceedings of the Respondent in G.D.N.No.82/2012-2013 dated 23.08.2012, quash the same as illegal and against the provisions of the Act.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for taxes, appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. In view of the similar orders passed by this Court, in a number of writ petitions, including the order, dated 21.12.2010, made in W.P.No.29050 of 2010, the following order is passed: i) The petitioner shall pay the amount of tax of Rs.65,395/-, which is the amount of tax demanded by the authority concerned, while passing the detention order. ii) On payment of such tax amount, the goods detained shall be released and the same shall be subject to the final adjudication order, which may be passed by the authority concerned. iii) ...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »