Chennai Court March 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.
K.R.Vijaya Vs. Teacher Recruitment Board
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:11. 03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU W.P.No.1063 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 K.R.Vijaya ... Petitioner -Versus- 1.The Teacher Recruitment Board Rep. By its Chairman, 4th Floor, E.V.K.Sampath Maligai, DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai 600 006. 2.The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006. ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to revalue the Question Nos.45, 70 and 104 of Booklet Series ".C". of the written Examination for direct recruitment of PG Assistant 2012-13 in Tamil conducted on 21.07.2013 and to proceed with selection for the post of PG Assistant in Tamil based on the revaluation with correct key answer and consequently direct the respondents to revalue the answer book of the petitioner (Roll No.13PG27010635) and to select the petitioner to the post of PG Assistant in...
N.Kuppanan Vs. Ragunathan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:11. 03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN C.R.P.(NPD) (MD) No.508 of 2014 & C.R.P.(NPD) (MD) No.509 of 2014 and M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2014 N.Kuppanan ... Petitioner in both C.R.Ps vs Ragunathan ... Respondent in both C.R.Ps PRAYER (in C.R.P.(NPD) (MD) No.508 of 2014) Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the fair and decreetal order dated 26.02.2014 and made in E.A.No.33 of 2014 in E.A.No.108 of 2013 in E.P.No.145 of 2008 in O.S.No.219 of 1986, on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Karur. PRAYER (in C.R.P.(NPD) (MD) No.509 of 2014 ) Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the fair and decreetal order dated 26.02.2014 and made in E.A.No.34 of 2014 in E.A.No.108 of 2013 in E.P.No.145 of 2008 in O.S.No.219 of 1986, on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Karur. !For Petitioner ... Mr.R.Ma...
A.Gopikrishnan Vs. Secretary of Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:11. 03.2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU W.P.No.4692 of 2014 A.Gopikrishnan .. Petitioner - Vs - The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai 600 003. .. Respondent Prayer:- Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to publish the marks obtained by the petitioner in Group-II examination held on 04.11.2012 and consequently call the petitioner for oral test. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajaram For Respondent : Mr.N.S.Nandakumar, Standing Counsel for TNPSC - - - - - ORDER The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) conducted competitive examination for CSSE-I (Group-II) on 04.11.2012. The petitioner is one of the applicants and his registration number is 17141095. The petitioner participated in the written examination. The question paper was of objective type containing as ma...
P.Shanmugha Priya Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated:11.03.2014 Coram THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL W.P.No.2064 of 2012 P.Shanmugha Priya ..Petitioner versus 1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. By The Secretary, Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Director General of Police, Chennai. 3.The Secretary, TNPSC, No.1, Greams Road, Chennai 600 006. 4.H.Jeyalakshmi, Additional Superintendent of Police Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Chennai. 5.S.Umayal, Additional Superintendent of Police, No.13, Kamala Nagar, Porur, Chennai 600 116. 6.G.Subbulakshmi Additional Superintendent of Police, Namakkal..Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the 3rd Respondent dated 01.06.2011 made in Memo No.2538/PSD-A1/1999 and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondents to re-fix the seniority in terms of marks obtained in the ...
Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation Vs. the Income Tax Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated:11. 03.2014 Coram The Honourable Mrs.JUSTICE CHITRA VENKATARAMAN and The Honourable Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.338 to 340, 964 to 966 of 2007 and 2547 to 2553 of 2006 M/s.Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation, 82, Anna Salai, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. .... Appellant in all the above Tcs Vs. The Income Tax Officer (OSD), Company Circle -III(1), 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. .... Respondent in all the above Tcs T.C.(A)Nos.338 to 340 and 964 to 966 of 2007 filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 28th September, 2006 made in I.T.A.Nos.1037 to 1042/Mds/2006 for the assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03. T.C.(A)Nos.2547 too 2533 of 2006 filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 25th November, 2005 made in I.T.A.Nos.1625/Mds/93, 380/Mds/95, 1052/Mds/97, 1791/Mds/99, 1915/Mds/2000, 1377/Mds/93, 908Mds/97 and 1171Mds/94 for the assessm...
C.Nagaraj Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.DHANAPALAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM H.C.P.No.2034 of 2013 C.Nagaraj .Petitioner versus 1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. By its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9. 2.The District Collector and District Magistrate of Vellore District, Vellore - 9.Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of habeas corpus, to call for the entire records relating to petitioner's son detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order, dated 28.08.2013 on the file of the second respondent herein made in proceedings C3. D.O.No.79/2013 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the said petitioner's son namely Saranraj, son of C.Nagaraj, aged 22 years before this Court and set the petitioner's son at liberty from detention, now petitioner'...
G.Palani Vs. Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJ.W.P.No.10108 of 2008 1. G.Palani 2. A.Krishnamurthy 3. G.Rajendran 4. T.Ramachandran 5. S.Ganesan 6. A.Anbarasan 7. N.Jayam .Petitioners -versus 1. The Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., rep. by its Chairman cum Managing Director 42, Thambuswamy Road Chennai-10 2. The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by its Secretary to Government Food, Co-operation and Consumer Protection Department Fort St.George Chennai-9 (R2 impleaded as per order dt. 21.6.13 in M.P.No.1 of 2013 in W.P.No.10108 of 2008) .Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the G.O.Ms.No.213, Food, Co-operation and Consumer Protection (A1) Department dated 15.10.1998 of the second respondent along with the consequential proceeding No.AE3/23706/07 dated 5.4.2007 of the fiRs.respondent herein, quash both the or...
M/S. Sree Kaderi Ambal Steels Ltd. Vs. Cce, Madurai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Mar-10-2014
1. The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Bars and Rods of Iron and Steel articles, classifiable under Chapter 72 of the CETA, 1985. They availed MODVAT credit on the inputs namely MS Ingots and Billets under Rule 57A of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. They cleared the ingots cut end pieces to their sister unit for converting them into ingots by melting without payment of duty under Rule 57F(3) of the erstwhile Rules, 1944 during the period from August 1995 to October 1995. 2. Show-cause notice was issued proposing demand of duty of Rs.2,61,818/-, which was confirmed by the adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original No. 25/1996 dated 27.3.1996. The appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and also reversed the said amount from their RG23A Part II account under protest. Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the appellant vide Order-in-Appeal No. 128/98 dated 28.9.1998. Revenue filed ap...
S. Krishnamoorthi Vs. Hdfc Bank, Represented by Its Manager
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
(The Appellant is the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying certain relief. The District Forum rejected the complaint. Against the said order, the appellant / complainant filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CCSR.No.210/2012, dated 08.04.2013.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member The complainant is the appellant. 2. The complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Chengalpattu which was assigned as CCSR.No.210/2012 and it was placed before us by the registry for considering the maintainability of the complaint. The complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service against the opposite party regarding the hire purchase loan availed by the complainant through the bank for the purchase of two wheeler from one Sharadha Motors, Kancheepuram since all the post dated cheques issued for EMIs were encashed by the bank and subsequently the opposite party demanded payment of dues for t...
M/S. Mats Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chenn ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Mar-07-2014
1. The applicant has filed this application for condoning the delay of 196 days involved in the filing of the appeal. 2. The learned counsel submits that the applicant is a small enterprise. He further submits that the Director of the applicant-company was looking after the entire work. He submits that the Directors daughter expired on 16.11.2013 at Mangalore and therefore he proceeded to Mangalore to settle his daughters family and hence there was a delay in filing the appeal. Apart from that, the concerned employee of the applicant-company left the job without intimating the receipt of the order. 3. On the other hand, the learned AR submits that the Directors daughter expired on 16.11.2012 and the impugned order was received by the applicant on 21.2.2013. He submits that the death of the Directors daughter has no relevance in the facts of the present case. 4. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, I find force in the submission of the learned AR for Revenue. It is se...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »