Chennai Court March 2014 Judgments
The Branch Manager, Vs. 1.Parthiban
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM C.M.A(MD)No.208 OF2014and M.P(MD)NO.1 of 2014 The Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, 1580,New Road, Kovilpatti..Appellant .versus 1.Parthiban 2.K.Balasubramanian (Second respondent remained ex-parte before before the lower Court) ..Respondents PRAYER Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgement and decree made in M.C.O.P.No.89 of 2009, dated 20.08.2013, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Subordinate Judge),Srivilliputhur. For Appellant : M/s.K.Bhaskaran For Respondent-1 : M/s.M.Thirunavukkarasu * * * :JUDGMENT Challenging the award passed by the Tribunal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Sub-ordinate Judge).Srivilliputhur in M.C.O.P.No.89 of 2009, the Insurance company has filed this appeal. 2.The brief facts of the case are that on 25.11.2008, the Petitioner as a billion rider travell...
Tag this Judgment!M.Veeraswamy Vs. Principal of Thanjavur Medical College
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :25. 03.2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE K.B.K.VASUKI W.P.No.13298 of 2006 (OA.No.1659 of 2004) M.Veeraswamy .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Principal Thanjavur Medical College, Thanjavur. 2.The Director of Medical Education Chennai-4. .. Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition, having been transferred from the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.1659 of 2004, is filed to call for the records of the respondents 1 and 2 in connection with the impugned orders issued in Na.Ka.No.21579/97/N5 dated 03.12.2002 and Ref.No.8308/E5/3/04 dated 25.02.2004 respectively and to quash the same and direct the respondent to draw and disburse the with-hold pensionary benefits to the applicant and grant him such other further relief. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Venkataramani, SC for S.Chandrasekaran For Respondents : M/s.S.Navaneetham, AGP ORDER The short point that arises for consideration herein is as to whether the petitioner is liable to repay t...
Tag this Judgment!R.Manikandan Vs. District Collector of Erode
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN W.P.No.6973 of 2014 R.Manikandan ..Petitioner versus 1.The District Collector, Erode. 2.The Sub-Collector, Gobichettipalayam, Erode District 638 501. 3. The Thasildar, Anthiyur, Erode District 638 501..Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the production of the records relating to the proceedings dated 17.02.2014, made in Na.Ka.No.1222/14-A3, passed by the 2nd respondent herein quash the same, and direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to release the Tractor bearing registration No.TN-36R-8654 to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Senthilnathan For Respondents : Mr.V.Shanmugasundar Government Advocate ORDER The writ petitioner submits that he is the owner of the Tractor bearing registration No.TN-36R-8654, and the said Tractor had been used for carrying building construction stones, fo...
Tag this Judgment!Palaniammal Vs. Kumarrakkal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :25.03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. KARUPPIAH C.R.P.No.3903 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 Palaniammal W/o. Lakshmana Gounder .. Petitioner/2nd defendant ..Vs.. Kumarrakkal W/o. Subramanian .. Respondent/Plaintiff Prayer:- The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, against the order and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.316 of 2005 in O.S.No.778 of 1989 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Pollachi. For Petitioner : Mrs.R.T.Shyamala For Respondent : Mr. C.Veeraraghavan - - - - - ORDER: The revision petitioner who is the second defendant in O.S. No.778 of 1989, filed this revision petition against the order dated 14.3.2006 made in I.A.No.316 of 2005.2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on records.3. The respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.778 of 1989 against the revision petitioner and another (i.e.) first defendant, namely, Gunasekaran and...
Tag this Judgment!T.K.Arun Vs. Ezhaliveerappan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:25. 03.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR S.A.No.849 of 2006 T.K.Arun .. Appellant -Vs- 1.Ezhaliveerappan 2.Balaraman .. Respondents Second Appeal filed under Section 100 C.P.C against the judgment and decree of the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore made in A.S.No.26 of 2005 dated 26.10.2005, reversing the decree and judgment of the Court of the Additional District Munsif, Cuddalore made in O.S.No.330 of 2000 dated 30.07.2004. For Appellant : Mr.K.V.Shanmuganathan For Respondents : Mr.R.Muralidharan for R1 R2 - No appearance ----- JUDGMENT The plaintiff in the original suit O.S.No.330 of 2000 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Cuddalore is the appellant in the second appeal. The second defendant and the first defendant in the original suit are respectively respondents 1 and 2 in the second appeal. Admittedly, Balaraman, the second respondent/first defendant was the owner of the suit property and he ex...
Tag this Judgment!Syed Abdul Haleem, Chennai Vs. Dwarkamai Builders, Rep by Its Propriet ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
(The complainant filed a complaint before this Commission against the opposite parties praying for a direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.52,62,500/- towards the cost of completion of unfinished / uncompleted works by the opposite party with 12% interest from the date of abandoning of the site on 22.10.2011 till the date of repayment and to pay Rs.7,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency of service, negligence and dereliction of duty, to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- for mental agony and to pay costs. The complaint came before us for final hearing on 04.03.2014, upon hearing the arguments on either side, perusing the documents, this commission made the following the orders. A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The complaint filed under Section 12 and 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The complainant filed a complaint alleging deficiency of service e regarding the completion of building work entrusted with the opposite parties claiming for refund of Rs.52,62,500/...
Tag this Judgment!C.S. Premanand Vs. Vairavan and Sons, Rep by Is Proprietor Vairavan
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
(The appellant is the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying certain relief. The District Forum dismissed the complaint. Against the said order, the appellant / complainant filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.215/2010, dated 16.12.2010. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 11.03.2014, upon hearing the arguments on either side, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. 2. The complainant availed finance facility for Rs.2,50,000/- from the opposite party for the purchase of Toyota Quails car bearing Regn.No.TN 30 3393 for which the complainant entrusted original RC book and cheque leaves drawn on Catholic Syrian Bank as security and even after settlement of full loan amount of Rs.3,52,500/- to the opposite part...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Syed Jabber Vs. Dwarkamai Builders, Rep by Its Proprietor, P. Soun ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
(The complainant filed a complaint before this Commission against the opposite parties praying for a direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.16,45,590/- towards the cost of work to be completed by the opposite party with 12% interest from the date of abandoning of the site on 22.10.2011 till the date of repayment and to pay Rs.35,000/- being the monthly compensation for the delay in delivering of completed house and to pay Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency of service, negligence and dereliction of duty, to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- for mental agony and to pay costs. The complaint came before us for final hearing on 04.03.2014, upon hearing the arguments on either side, perusing the documents, this commission made the following the orders:) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The complaint filed under Section 12 and 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The complainant filed a complaint alleging deficiency of service e regarding the completion of building...
Tag this Judgment!The Manager, the Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. Salem Salai, Namakkal Vs. K.R ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
(The Respondents are the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying certain relief. The District Forum allowed the complaint. Against the said order, the appellant / opposite party filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.51/2007, dated 29.07.2011. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 05.03.2014, upon hearing the arguments on either side, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member The opposite party is the appellant. 2. The 1st complainant having account in A/c.No.79670 with the opposite party received an intimation from the opposite party through phone on 18.4.2007 informing that one Ravi had withdrawn Rs.30,000/- from her account using cheque No.401560 and also received two other cheques for collection from Karur Visya Bank in which the dates are corrected and the c...
Tag this Judgment!S. Seshayee, Proprietor Vs. P. Chinnaiya and Others
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2014
(The 1st 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 / 1st opposite party filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.24/2010, dated 10.08.2011. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 06.03.2014, upon hearing the arguments on either side, perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Forum, this commission made the following order.) A.K. Annamalai, Judicial Member 1. The 1st opposite party is the appellant. 2. The complainant through his representative filed a complaint against the opposite parties 1 to 3 alleging deficiency of service regarding the supply of gas cylinder and claimed to refund of excess amount of Rs.22.71 paid and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for making the complainant by harassing in non supply of the gas cylin...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »