Chennai Court February 2014 Judgments
K.Srinivasan Vs. the Secretary to Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :25. 02.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M. VENUGOPAL W.P.No.11407 of 2012 K.Srinivasan ... Petitioner Vs 1. The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.2. The Engineer in Chief W.R.O & Chief Engineer (General), Public Works Department, Chepauk, Chennai-5.3. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Organisation, Thiruchirapalli Division, Thiruchirapalli.4. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Pudukottai Division, Pudukottai. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the Petitioner on compassionate grounds in any suitable post based on his qualification. For Petitioner : M/s.Malarvizhi Udayakumar For Respondents : Mr.V.Subbiah Spl. Govt. Pleader ORDER The Petitioner has preferred the instant Writ of Mandamus praying for passing of an order by this Court in directing...
Tag this Judgment!S.Kantilal Prakash Chand JaIn Vs. M.Suvee Raja
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:25. 02.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR C.R.P (NPD) No.4841 of 2013 & M.P.No.1 of 2013 S.Kantilal Prakash Chand Jain ... Petitioner vs. M.Suvee Raja ... Respondent Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25(1) of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as amended by Act 23 of 1973 and Act 1 of 1980 against the judgment and decree dated 25.06.2013 passed in R.C.A.No.172 of 2010 passed by the learned VIII Judge (Rent Control Appellate Authority) Court of Small Causes, Chennai by confirming the judgment and decree dated 13.08.2008 passed by the learned XVI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras (Rent Controller) in R.C.O.P.No.1000 of 2007, u/s. 10(3)(a)(iii) of the act. For Petitioner : M/s.N.Gomathi for Mr.K.P.Ashok For Respondent : Mr.G.Jahanathan ORDER The respondent has entered appearance through counsel by lodging a caveat. The submissions made by Ms.Gomathi, learned counsel for the petitioner a...
Tag this Judgment!Saraswathi Vs. B.N.Ramachandran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:25. 02.2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESAN CS.No.1036/2010 1.Saraswathi 2.Lalitha 3.Rukmani 4.T.Usha 5.Vijayalakshmi Plaintiffs Vs 1.B.N.Ramachandran 2.B.N.Gopalan 3.B.N.Venkatasubramanian 4.Nagalakshmi Seshatri Defendants Prayer:- This Civil Suit is filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules and Order VII Rule 1 of CPC for the reliefs as stated therein. For Plaintiffs : Mr.V.K.Vijayaraghavan For Defendants : Mr.P.B.Balaji-D1 & D4 Mr.Aruna Ganesh-D2 Mr.V.S.Nagrajan-D3 JUDGEMENT This civil suit has been filed to (a) pass a preliminary decree for partition of 5/9th share of the Plaintiff in the suit property, (b) appoint a Commissioner with a direction to divide the suit property by metes and bounds considering the convenience of enjoyment of property by the parties, (c) pass a final decree in terms of Commissioner's report, (d) direct the Defendants 1 and 3 to pay mesne profits lawfully due to the Plaintiffs...
Tag this Judgment!G.Neela Vs. S.Manokaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:25.02.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR Cont.P.No.1119 of 2012 G.Neela ... petitioner Versus 1.Mr.S.Manokaran, The Superintendent of Police, Kanchipuram District, Kanchipuram. 2.K.Ramdoss, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Retd.) Plot No.1352/13, Vallalar Colony, 19th Main Road, Anna Nagar (West), Chennai 40. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Kancheepuram. ... Respondents (2nd 3rd respondents are suo motu impleaded as per order dated 20.11.2013) Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondents for having committed willful contempt of the order of this Court dated 29.04.2011 made in Crl.O.P.No.2230/2008. For petitioner : Mr.P.Vijendran For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, Addl. Public Prosecutor. -------- ORDER This petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for punishing the respondents for their non-compliance with the order o...
Tag this Judgment!Secretary to Government Vs. R.Selvaraj
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:25. 02.2014 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.DHANAPALAN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY W.A.No.452 of 2013 1. The Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.2. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai-600 028. ... Appellants / Respondents -vs- R.Selvaraj .. Respondent / Petitioner Prayer: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, seeking to set aside the order dated 20.09.2012 made in W.P.No.14730 of 2012. For Appellants : Mr.R.Rajeswaran, Spl.Govt. Pleader For Respondent : Mr.S.Sivakumar ***** ORDER (Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.Dhanapalan,J.,) Heard Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants / respondents and Mr.S.Sivakumar, learned counsel for the respondent / petitioner.2. The writ appeal is filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.14730 of 2012 dated 20.09.2...
Tag this Judgment!Thambiyappan Vs. K.Rathinavelu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:25. 02.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR C.R.P (NPD).No.1496 of 2012 Thambiyappan @ Subramani ...Petitioners Vs. K.Rathinavelu ...Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Order of the Court of the District Munsif Court,Thirupattur in I.A.No.1037 of 2007 in O.S.No.157 of 2006 dated 29.10.2009. For Appellant :Mr.V.Raghavachari JUDGMENT Thambiyappan @ Subramani, the first defendant in O.S.No.157 of 2005 on the file of the Court of District Munsif, Thirupattur, Vellore District is the petitioner in the revision petition. K.Rathinavelu, the plaintiff in the said suit is the respondent in the revision petition.2. The respondent herein filed the above said suit against the revision petitioner and eight other persons for declaration of his title and permanent injunction against the defendants not to disturb his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properti...
Tag this Judgment!C.Kathikeyan Vs. the Secretary to Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :25. 02.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M. VENUGOPAL W.P.No.10347 of 2012 C.Kathikeyan ... Petitioner Vs 1. The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.2. The Engineer in Chief W.R.O & Chief Engineer (General), Public Works Department, Chepauk, Chennai-5.3. The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Water Resources Organisation, Thiruchirapalli Division, Thiruchirapalli.4. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Pudukottai Division, Pudukottai. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the Petitioner on compassionate grounds in any suitable post based on the Petitioner's qualification. For Petitioner : M/s.Malarvizhi Udayakumar For Respondents : Mr.V.Subbiah Spl. Govt. Pleader ORDER The Petitioner has preferred the instant Writ of Mandamus praying for passing ...
Tag this Judgment!R.R.Lakshmi Vs. Asstdirector Professional and Executive Employment Exc ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.02.2014 Coram: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL W.P.No.29360 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.2 & 3 of 2012 R.R.Lakshmi .Petitioner versus 1.The Assistant Director, Professional & Executive Employment Exchange Office, Santhome, Chennai-600 004. 2.The Chairman, Teacher Recruitment Board, College Road, Chennai-600 006.Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the Second Respondent pertaining to the recruitment for the post of Graduate Assistants in Geography under MGPR Quota and quash the impugned notification dated 08.09.2011 to the extent that ".Candidate under Most Backward General Priority is not available, issued by the second respondent and consequently direct the second respondent to call for certificate verification of the petitioner for the post of Graduate Assistant in Geograph...
Tag this Judgment!Valliammai Society Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:25. 02.2014 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. SIVAGNANAM W.P. No.5173 of 2010 Valliammai Society Rep., by its Chairman T.R.rachamuthu, No.68, Thambiah Road, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. ... Petitioner Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Dept., Fort Street George, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Special Tashildar, Land Acquisition, Tamil Nadu Housing Board Scheme, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. 3.Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep., by its Managing Director/Chairman, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. ... respondents Prayer :-Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to sel the property and measuring 2.28 acres comprised in survey No.134/1, Ramapuram village, Chennai to the petitioner at the value fixed by the High power committee appointed by the Government of Tamil Nadu following the directions of the first respondent in his l...
Tag this Judgment!Cce, Chennai âandeuro;andldquo; Iv Vs. M/S. Saint GobaIn Glass India ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Feb-24-2014
1. Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. The learned AR submits that the Department has filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) insofar as he has reduced the penalty from Rs.12,39,042/- to Rs. 1,00,000/- under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. She submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) proceeded on the basis of the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Wires Vs. Commissioner 2003 (153) ELT A307 (SC). She also submits that the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills 2009 (238) ELT 3 (SC) held that there is no discretionary power to impose penalty under Section 11AC of the Act. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that, on an identical issue, the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi III 2009 (240) ELT 641 (SC) held that no penalty is imposable. The issue involved in this case is whether credit would be r...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »