Chennai Court February 2014 Judgments
icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. V.Prakash
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE:18. 2.2014. CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN C.M.A.No.2777 of 2011, Cross Objection No.79 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 CMA No.2777/2011 M/s.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., Zenith House, Keghvrao Khade Marg, Mumbai 400 034. Appellant vs.1. V.Prakash 2. G.Ravikumar Respondents Cross Objection No.79/2012 V.Prakash Cross Objector vs.1. M/s.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., Zenith House, Keghvrao Khade Marg, Mumbai 400 034. having Chennai office at No.84 & 85, Arihand Plaza, I Floor, Wall Tax Road, Park Town, Chennai 600 003.2. G.Ravikumar Respondents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and Cross Objection against the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.4720 of 2007 dated 20.1.2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (IV Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai. For appellant/R1 in Cross Objection : Mrs.R.Sreevidhya For R1/Cross Objector : Mr.R.Thirugnanam for Mr.M.J.Vijayaraghavan COMMON JUDGMENT This appeal ha...
Tag this Judgment!A.Murugesan Vs. Secretary to Govt.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:18.02.2014 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. SIVAGNANAM W.P. No.13224 of 2010 A.Murugesan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Secretary to Govt., Commercial Taxes and Registration Dept., Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 028. ... Respondents Prayer:-Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for all the records on the file of the second respondents in No.46829/B2/U1/2006, dated 16.04.2010, quash the same and consequently, permit the petitioner to retire from service from 30.09.2005, with all retiremental/terminal benefits. For petitioner .. M/s.K.Moorthy and Mr.S.R.Sundar For Respondents .. Mr.R.Ravichandran A.G.P., for RR1&2 ORDER With the consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal.2. In this writ petition, the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!P.Rajasekaran Vs. 1.The District Collector,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-18-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.02.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI WRIT PETITION (Md.No.2149 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014 P.Rajasekaran ..Petitioner vs 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 3.The Animal Welfare Board of India, 13/1, Deewar Main Road, Valmigi Nagar, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai-41..Respondents Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to grant permission and necessary protection for conducting Jallikattu at Sakkudi Village, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai, District, on the eve of Arulmigu Muppili Swamy Temple Maha Sivarathi Festival on 08.03.2014, based on the representation made by the petitioner, dated 17.01.2014. !For Petitioner ..Mr.K.Mahendran ^For Respondents ..Mr.B.Pugalendhi, 1 & 2 Spl.Govt.Pleader. :ORDER (Order of t...
Tag this Judgment!E. Venkatraman, Ex L/Nk/Clk Vs. Union of India, Rep. by Its Secretary ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Feb-17-2014
V. Periya Karuppiah, Member (Judicial): 1. This application has been filed by the applicant for the relief to grant disability pension from the date of his invalidment on 27.01.1988 with 9% interest per annum towards the arrears and to order disability of the applicant at 40% pension being rounded off to 50%, in accordance with the letter of Government of India, MOD, dated 31.01.2001 and to grant Ex-Servicemen status and the benefits of Ex-Servicemen and also to grant other benefits. 2. The facts as stated in the affidavit would be as follows: The applicant was recruited in the Indian Army as Lance Naik/Clerk in the Mechanical Infantry Regiment on 07.12.1983. However, he was invalided out of service on 27.01.1988. The applicant served with utmost sincerity and hardwork and his tenure was an unblemished one. While serving in the army at Ambala Unit, the applicant had a sudden fall due to the terrible climatic conditions in snow bound area and he was admitted in Command Hospital, Chandig...
Tag this Judgment!Hony Nb Sub Paruru Ramachandraiah Vs. Union of India, Through the Secr ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
V. Periya Karuppiah, Member (Judicial): 1. This application has been filed by the applicant as party-inperson for the grant of relief as per Circular No. 430, dated 10th March 2010 to fix the pension for the Honorary Naib Subedar rank with effect from 1.7.2009 at Rs.9382/- as the same was affirmed by higher Courts and to direct the respondents to release the applicants pension of Honorary Naib Subedar with arrears with costs. 2. The factual matrix of the case of applicant as contained in the application would be as follows: The applicant joined the Indian Army as Sepoy on 20.05.1963 and he was discharged in the rank of Havildar after completing 24 years of unblemished record. Accordingly, he retired on 01st June 1987 and after his retirement, he was conferred with the rank of Honorary Naib Subedar and was receiving pension on par with Honorary Naib Subedar. He appealed for grant of pension of Honorary Rank of Naib Subedar to the respondents by petition dated 15th September 2011. The OI...
Tag this Judgment!The Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and Service Centre Vs. Dr. Raj ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
(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 appellant / 2nd opposite party filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.19/2010, dated 15.12.2010.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The 2nd opposite party is the appellant. 2. The complainant purchased Godrej Split AC machine from the 1st opposite party on 2.6.2009 for which the 2nd opposite party being the manufacturing company and service centre and within 3 months the A/c having a problem in the cooling system and a hole in the condenser tube was rectified after a complaint on 14.3.2010. Once again within a week there was another complaint of fault in the A/c indoor unit which was patched up with M.seal and thereafter there was leakage of water and the opposite party did not deputed the labour and sufficient workman to the repair work and after...
Tag this Judgment!Chellasamy Vs. Union of India, Rep. by Its Secretary and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai
Decided on: Feb-14-2014
V. Periya Karuppiah, Member (Judicial): 1. This application has been filed by the applicant for the grant of relief to call for the records including Letter dated 27.03.2012 in File No.G2/II/Misc/2012 on the file of PCDA (P), Allahabad and to grant of pension benefits as per the recommendations of VI Central Pay Commission to the pre-1.1.2006 retirees and consequently to direct the respondents to extend the benefits of the Letter dated 12.06.2009 to the applicant who retired prior to 01.01.2006. 2. The factual matrix of the case of applicant as contained in the application would be as follows: The applicant joined the Indian Army as Sepoy on 20.08.1968 and he was discharged in the rank of Havildar after completing 24 years of unblemished record. Accordingly, he retired on 31.08.1992 and after his retirement, he was conferred with the rank of Honorary Naib Subedar and was receiving pension on par with Honorary Naib Subedar. The applicant was also issued Pension Payment Order No.S/019084...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Promac Engineering Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (E ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
1. Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of cement plants in CKD condition. They exported the cement plants during the period 2006 2007 under Advance Licences. But, they have filed free shipping bills without any declaration and endorsement of the Advance Licences. The learned counsel submitted that they filed the documents to Jt. DGFT for fulfillment of the export obligation. The office of the Jt. DGFT informed them to endorse the shipping bills with Advance Licence number. By letter dated 20.6.2009, they requested the Customs authorities for Endorsement of the Advance Licences No. 0710046837/02.06.2006 on seven shipping bills. By communication dated 19.8.2009, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Exports) informed the appellant with the approval of Commissioner of Customs (Exports) that the request for endorsement of seven Advance Licences cannot be entertained. 3. The learned co...
Tag this Judgment!Rajkumar and Rajkumar Shankar and Another Vs. Anand, Proprietor, Tride ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
(The Appellants are the complainants filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying certain relief. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Not satisfied with the order, the appellants/ complaints iled this appeal praying for enhancement of the order of the District Forum in CC.No.2/2012, dated 15.03.2013.)A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The complainants are the appellant. 2. The complainants having their clinic by name Murugan Dental Clinic at Korattur, Chennai decided to replace the old equipment with new one for that Purpose , the complainants 1 and 2 placed purchase order to the opposite party for Gnatus Inova Pad Detal Chair (Metallic Sky Blue), noise free oil free which is an imported compressor (DA 1001 DAAIR). Further, other equipments namely UV Sterilizer, NSK Airtor Handpiece and the Xpeed mircromotor Control unit also have been ordered for a total amount of Rs.1,65,000/- and for which, they made full payments to the opposite party by way ...
Tag this Judgment!M. Gopal Vs. the Standard Chartered Bank, Adyar Branch, Rep by Its Man ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
(The Appellant 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 appellant /complainant filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.60/2005, dated 12.01.2010.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The complainant is the appellant. 2. The complainant having SB account with the 1st opposite party and also a retired employee of the same bank having credit card account with the SBI, having facilities for withdrawal of cash limit of Rs.31,200/- and issued a cheque dated 14.06.2004 for a sum of Rs.12,135.17 drawn on the 1st opposite party bank favouring the State bank of India credit card division. The 1st opposite party dishonoured the cheque even though he was having sufficient funds in his account for the reasons œsignature differs?. Once again the complainant issued another cheque for the same which was also wrongly...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »