Chennai Court February 2014 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 Manager, Charge Back, Icici Bank and Others Vs. S.P. Subramaniyan ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
(The Respondent is the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite parties praying certain relief. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, the appellants / opposite parties 1 to 4 filed the appeal in F.A.No.290/2009 and the appellant / 5th opposite party filed in F.A.No.596/2011 praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.369/2003, dated 08.12.2008.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1.The opposite parties 1 to 4 and 5th opposite parties are the separate appellants in this appeal. 2. The complainant lured by the opposite parties representative has become member of credit card. Basing on the canvas by the opposite parties 2 to 4 purchase of goods carries 0% interest and purchased a VCD from the 5th opposite party on 27.2.2002 by paying a sum of Rs.21,240/- under the said scheme and terms and conditions opposite parties 1 and 2 and complainant paid four instalments in the next month itself and the purchase was reco...
Deepak Kumar Babulal and Another Vs. the Income Tax Officer and Anothe ...
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member: These two appeals are filed by the Assessee and the Revenue, aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-IV, Chennai in ITA No.596/2011-12 dated 12.03.2013 for assessment year 2009-10 passed under section 143(3 ) read with section 147 and Sec.250 of the Act. 2. The Assessee has raised several argumentative and elaborate grounds in his appeal, and they are briefly stated herein-below for adjudication. 1. Ld. Ld. CIT (A) had erred by confirming the addition to the extent of Rs.36,74,800/- as unexplained investment in shares. 2. Ld. CIT(A) had erred by remitting back the issue with the direction in regard to the addition of Rs.2,05,468 towards profit on sale of shares under the head short term capital gain without considering the fact that the gain arrived from the sale of shares were long term capital gain and further exempt U/s. 10(38) of the Act. 3. Similarly the Revenue has raised several argumentative grounds and they are concised herein-below for...
Commissioner of Customs Chennai Vs. Redington (India) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
Mathew John, J. 1. Ten appeals filed by Revenue against the same respondent are being considered in this proceeding because all these appeals involve same issue. Further, it was noticed at the stage of hearing the stay petitions that the issue in dispute has already been decided in two orders of the Tribunal, one such order being Final Order No.40492-40495/2013 dt.23.9.2013. Therefore, after disposing the stay petitions, the appeals were taken up for hearing and both sides were heard accordingly. 2. The issue involved in these appeals is refund claim filed by the respondent for Special Customs Duty [SAD] under provisions of notification No.102/07-Cus. dt. 14.9.07. 3. SAD is levied under section 3 (5) of Customs Tariff Act, 1985 by issuing Notification No.19/06-Cus. dt. 1.3.2006. This duty is levied at the time of importation of goods in lieu of Sales Tax/VAT levied by the States. There is a scheme under which the importer can claim refund of SAD paid if it is proved that after importa...
M.Selvaraj Vs. Indian Overseas Bank
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04.02.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN W.P.No.4053 of 1998 and W.P.M.P.No.375 of 2012 M.Selvaraj ..Petitioner versus 1.The Deputy General Manager, Disciplinary Authority, Indian Overseas Bank, 763, Annasalai, Chennai 2. 2.The General Manager, Appellate Authority, Indian Overseas Bank, 763, Annasalai, Chennai 2..Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the order of the 1st respondent made in Ref.No.Do-DGM(RN) : DA : 95, dated 18.09.1995 as confirmed by the second respondent order made in Ref.No.DO : G.M (RV) : AA :97, dated 24.02.1997 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.C.R.Chandrasekaran For Respondents : Mr.N.G.R.Prasad ORDER The writ petitioner is filing this writ petition challenging the order of the 1st respondent viz., the Deputy General Manager, Disciplinary Authority, Indian Overseas Bank, dated 18.09.19...
Ramasamy Vs. State by Ins of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:04. .02.2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR . JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Criminal Appeal No.549 of 2013 Ramasamy ... Appellant -Vs- State rep by Inspector of Police Chennimalai Police Station Crime No.149 of 2012 Erode District. ... Respondent This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the conviction imposed in the judgment dated 01.08.2013 made in S.C.No.10 of 2013 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Erode sentencing the sole accused u/s 302 IPC life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- i/d to undergo simple imprisonment for three years; u/s 201 IPC Seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- i/d to undergo one year simple imprisonment. For Appellant : Mr.N.Manoharan For Respondent : Mr.V.M.R.Rajendran Additional Public Prosecutor JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.N.PRAKASH, J.]. The sole accused, Ramasamy, who was tried by the learned Principal Sessions Judge...
S.Sivalingam Vs. Commissioner of Survey
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 04.02.2014 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.P.No.708 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 S.Sivalingam ..Petitioner Vs., 1.The Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Survey and Settlement, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 2.The Additional Director, Department of Survey and Land Records, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 3.The Settlement Officer, Office of Commissioner of Survey and Settlements, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 4.The Personal Assistant to the Director of Survey and Settlements, Office of the Commissioner of Survey and Settlements, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005..Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed in Na.Ka.No.A1/94/2013, dated 04.01.2013 on the file of the fiRs.respondent and the subsequent order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.R2/289/2013 (L.S.) dated 04...
F.S.K.Ravikumar Vs. P.Umapathy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:04. 02.2014 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR C.R.P.(NPD) No.2822 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 F.S.K.Ravikumar ... Petitioner Vs. 1.P.Umapathy 2.K.Vijyakumar 3.K.Sureshkumar ... Respondents Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC to set aside the fair and decreetal order of Subordinate Judge, Tiruvallur dated 13.02.2013 made in I.A.No.366/2011 in O.S.No.175 of 2009 For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Subramanian For Respondents : Mr.M.Manivasagam ORDER The first defendant in the original suit in O.S.No.175/2009 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Tirvallur is the petitioner in the revision petition. The plaintiff in the original suit is the first respondent in the revision petition. The other defendants in the original suit are the respondents 2 and 3 in the revision petition.2. The above said suit in O.S.No.175/2009 was filed by Umpathy, the first respondent herein, against the revision petitioner and the re...
V.Lakshmi Vs. R.Veerabathiran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:04. 02.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R. SHIVAKUMAR C.R.P.[NPD]. No.3854 of 2013 V.Lakshmi ... Petitioner/Defendant .. Vs .. R.Veerabathiran ... Respondent/Plaintiff Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition preferred under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the Fair and Decreetal order dated 26.08.2013 passed by the learned Additional District Munsif, Ponnamallee, in I.A.No.525 of 2013 in O.S.No.430 of 2010. For Petitioner : Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for M/s. R.Bharathkumar For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkatavaradhan - - - - - ORDER The defendant in O.S.No.430 of 2010 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Poonamallee is the petitioner in the present revision. The respondent, who filed the suit as plaintiff for permanent injunction, is none other than the husband of the revision petitioner. The suit was filed by him for permanent injunction not to alienate the suit property in favour of any third party.2. It is n...
Prem Karthick Vs. State by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:04. .02..2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR . JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Criminal Appeal No.385 of 2012 Prem @ Prem Karthick ... Appellant -Vs- State through The Inspector of Police K-4, Anna Nagar Police Station Chennai 40. (Crime No.213/2008) ... Respondent This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and sentence passed by learned Mahila Court at Chennai dated 29.05.2012 in S.C.No.369/2008 convicting the appellant herein and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of which to undergo further simple imprisonment period of 6 months for an alleged offence under Section 364(A) IPC. For Appellant : Mr.Kingston Jerald For Respondent : Mr.V.M.R.Rajendran Additional Public Prosecutor JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.N.PRAKASH, J.) The first accused Prem @ Prem Karthick, in S.C.No.369/2008, who was convicted for an offence under S...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Govindan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE:04. 2.2014. CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN C.M.A.No.2225 of 2010 and M.P.No.1 of 2010 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., No.102, Yercadu-Junction Road, Premier Complex, Salem. Appellant vs.1. Govindan 2. P.Karuppannan Respondents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.396 of 2004 dated 3.1.2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Fast Track Court III), Namakkal. For appellant : Mr.K.Padmanabhan For R1 : Mr.R.Maruthchalamoorthy JUDGMENT This Civil Miscellaneous Appeals has been filed against the award dated 03.01.2006 in M.C.O.P No.396 of 2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, Dharmapuri.2. The Insurance Company is the appellant in the Appeal. The Claim arises out of the accident that took place on 13.09.2002 and the first respondent in the appeal, who was travelling in the Tractor bearing registration No TN30Y0750with a Trailer, was injured because of the ras...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »