Chennai Court February 2013 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.
K.S.Mani Vs. Board of Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporati ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:4. 2.2013 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.No.26572 of 2011 K.S.Mani .. Petitioner Vs.1. The Board, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd. Rep. by its Secretary (A/c) Secretariat Branch 144, Anna Salai Chenna002. 2. The Chairman and Managing Director Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd. Secretariat Branch 144, Anna Salai Chenna002. .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the proceedings of the second respondent vide (Permanent) CMD TANGEDCO Proceedings No.29, culminating in his order dated 19.2.2011, as confirmed by the order of the first respondent vide (Permanent) (FB) TANGEDCO Proceedings No.40, dated 28.9.2011, to quash the same and to direct the second respondent to permit the petitioner to retire from service as Executive Engineer with effect from 30.4.2006 with all termi...
M.Ranganathan Vs. District Collector
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated 4.2.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition No.33088 of 2005 M.Ranganathan. ... Petitioner vs. 1.District Collector, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore. 2.The Block Development Officer, Kinathukadavu Panchayat Union, Kinathukadavu, Pollachi (TK), Coimbatore District. ... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from allotting to the beneficiaries as per the list prepared by the respondents of the houses constructed under the Periyar Ninaivu Samathuvapuram Scheme at Vadachittoor Panchayat Kinathukadavu Union, Coimbatore District, consequently select the beneficiaries as per the procedure laid down in the scheme and allot house to the petitioner in the Periyar Ninaivu Samathuvapuram, Vadachittoor. For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Balasubramaniam For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Ramesh, Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.K.Elango f...
P.Madhu Vs. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 4 2.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR W.P.No.32715 o1. P.Madhu, 2.N.Babu. .. Petitioners vs. 1.Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, represented by its Secretary, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. 2.The Director, Rural Development, Saidapet, Chennai-15. 3.S.Arul Kumaran. .. Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to revise the seniority list in the post of Assistant Engineers (Rural Development) in Panchayats -1997 for selection to the post of Assistant Executive Engineers (Rural Development) on the basis of merit list determined by marks obtained by the respective candidates, and promote the petitioners to the post of Assistant Executive Engineers (Rural Development). For Petitioner : Mrs.AL.Gandhimathi For Respondents : Mr.C.N.G.Niraimathi, for R1 Mr.M.S.Ramesh, Additional Government Pleader for R2 No appearance for R3 ----- O ...
Balu Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :04. 02.2013 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N. BASHA and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DEVADASS Criminal Appeal No.361 of 2012 Balu @ Balamurugan .. Appellant/Accused Vs. State : Inspector of Police, Kai Kalathur, Perambalur District. .. Respondent/Complainant Prayer : Appeal filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against his conviction and sentence made in S.C.No.77/2010 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur by Judgment dated 18.5.2012. For Appellants : Mr.A.Padmanabhan For Respondent : Mr. V.M.R.Rajendran Additional Public Prosecutor JUDGMENT P. DEVADASS, J.The appellant is accused in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur in the sessions case in S.C.No.77/2010.2. On 18.5.2012, the learned Additional Sessions Judge found the accused guilty under Sections 302 and 392 IPC and sentenced him to life under Section 302 IPC and also sentenced him to 10 years rigorous imp...
K.Doraian Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 4 2.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR W.P.No.30526 of 2005 K.Doraian .. Petitioner vs. 1.Government of Tamil Nadu, represented by Secretary to Government, Environment and Forests Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9. 2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Chennai-15. .. Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the panel of Forest Rangers, fit for promotion as Assistant Conservator of Forests for the year 2001-2002, approved in G.O.Ms.No.93, Environment and Forests Department, dated 21.6.2005, without prejudice to the claim for inclusion in the appropriate previous panel after the appeal against the punishment is disposed of, and to promote the petitioner as Assistant Conservator of Forests, with retrospective effect from the date of promotion of his immediate junior with ...
P.Selvam Vs. Spl Commr for Handicapped
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:4. 2.2013 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.2698 of 2013 P.SELVAM [ PETITIONER ] Vs 1 THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER FOR HANDICAPPED O/O. THE STATE COMMISSIONER OF DISABLED, NO.15/1 MODEL SCHOOL ROAD THOUSAND LIGHTS, CHENNAI 6 2 THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER HIGHWAYS AND RURAL WORKS DEPARTMENT SAIDAPET, CHENNAI 3 3 THE COMMISSIONER CORPORATION OF CHENNAI, RIPPON BUILDING CHENNAI 3 4 THE HEALTH OFFICER CORPORATION OF CHENNAI, EGMORE CHENNAI 8 5 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE EGMORE, CHENNAI 8 [ RESPONDENTS ] Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to dispose of the petitioner representation dated 23.1.2012 for issuance of Licence for running Bunk Shop on the line of E.V.R. High Road, infront of Rajiv Gandhi Hospital Near by Subway behind C4, Police Station, Chennai 3 and not interfere till date of dispose of the petitioner re...
Mahavishnu Vs. Junior Engineer Tneb
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:4. 2.2013 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.19509 of 2012 MAHAVISHNU [ PETITIONER ] S/O.PERIYASAMY, REP. BY HIS SIVAPRAKASAM S/O. ADHIMOOLAM, VASUDEVANUR, THANGAMTHEERTHAPURAM P.O. KALLAKURICHI TALUK VILLUPURAM DISTRICT. Vs 1 THE JUNIOR ENGINEER ALAIS C.A. TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD RAYAPPANUR, KUTTU ROAD P.O. KALLAKURICHI TALUK VILLUPURAM DISTRICT. 2 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD RAYAPPANUR, KUTTU ROAD P.O. KALLAKURICHI TALUK VILLUPURAM DISTRICT. 3 THE JUNIOR ENGINEER OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE T.N.E.B. OFFICE KANIYAMOOR, CHINNA SALEM P.O. KALLAKURICHI TALUK VILLUPURAM DISTRICT. 4 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER T.N.E.B. ANNA NAGAR KALLAKURICHI-606 202 VILLUPURAM DISTRICT. 5 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT-605 602. 6 THE CHIEF ENGINEER TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD HEAD OFFICE 9 H FLOOR, MOUNT ROAD CHENNAI-2. 7 THE CHAIRMAN VIGIL...
P.ilangovan Vs. Director General of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 4 2.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR W.P.No.25507 of 2005 P.Ilangovan, ... Petitioner vs. 1.The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai. 2.The Inspector General of Police, Armed Police, Trichy. ... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the impugned endorsement dated 21.6.2005 made in R.C.not A2/18416/2004 passed by the second respondent and quash the same; and consequently direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for promotion to the post of RT Sub-Inspector of Police forthwith by adopting the due seniority from the Naik Post. For Petitioner : Mr.H.Mohamed Rafi For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Ramesh, Additional Government Pleader ----- O R D E R This writ petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the impugned endorsement dated 21.6.2005 made in R.C.not A2/18416/2004...
Ms. Kovai Sarala the Assistant Commissioner Vs. Central Circle Iv(3).
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. In this appeal filed by the assessee, her grievance is that ld. CIT (Appeals) had dismissed her appeal for a reason that she did not enter appearance on the dates of postings for hearing. 2 I.T. (SS) A. No. 35/Mds/12 2. Learned A.R. submitted that ld. CIT (Appeals) had no power to dismiss appeal filed before him for non-prosecution, but he had to deal such appeal on merits. 3. Per contra, learned D.R. fairly admitted that the appeal had to be restored back to ld. CIT (Appeals) to be decided on merits. 4. We find that the CIT (Appeals) had not adjudicated the issues on merits but had dismissed it for non-prosecution. No doubt, the assessee might have been given opportunity to enter appearance, but she had failed to do so. Nevertheless, we find that the co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Questnet Enterprises India Private Limited v. ACIT in I.T.A. Nos. 1821 and 1822/Mds/2011 had considered a similar issue. In its order dated 18...
M/S. Sri Muthu Venkata the Income-tax Officer, Subramaniam Trust, Vs. ...
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2013
Dr. O.K. Narayanan, Vice-President These appeals are filed by the assessee. The first appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, rejecting the application filed by the assessee for obtaining registration under sec.12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The second appeal is filed against the order of the Commissioner Income-tax, rejecting the application filed by the assessee for grant of approval under sec. 80G(vi) of the Act. 2. When the assessee applied for registration under sec.12AA, the Commissioner of Income-tax called for a number of details from the assessee and also from the concerned Assessing Officer. The details called for by the Commissioner of Income-tax related to the books of account, bank accounts, permanent account number, charitable activities carried on by the assessee, etc. In fact the application by the assessee was put in on 2.2.2012. The trust was registered on 14.11.2011. Within that short time the assessee had not carried on any charita...