Chennai Court April 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.
J.S.Vidhyasagar Vs. V.Suresh Babu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED. 03.04.2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM Crl.O.P.No.10378 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012 J.S.Vidhyasagar ... Petitioner/Accused Vs. V.Suresh Babu ... Respondent/Complainant Prayer: Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, praying to call for the records relating to the order dated 23.02.2012 made in C.M.P.No.612 of 2012 in S.T.C.No.71 of 2011 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court No.II, Erode, and set aside the same by allowing this criminal original petition. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manokaran For Respondent : Mr.V.S.Kesavan - - - - - ORDER This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court No.II, Erode, in C.M.P.No.612 of 2012 in S.T.C.No.71 of 2011, dated 23.02.2012.2. A private complaint has been filed by the respondent / complainant against the petitioner / a...
N.Ashish Karwa Vs. 1.A.Pinki Sureka
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:03. 04.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.392 of 2014 and C.R.P.(PD)(MD)Nos.393 & 394 of 2014 and M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2014 in C.R.P.(PD) (MD) No.392 of 2014 N.Ashish Karwa ... Petitioner / 2nd Defendant / Petitioner in all C.R.Ps -vs- 1.A.Pinki Sureka 2.M/s.Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ramanathapuram 3.M/s.Krishna Trading Corporation through it's Proprietor H.Anand Kumar Sureka ... Plaintiff / Defendants 1 & 3 / Respondents/Respondents PRAYER (in C.R.P.(PD) (MD) No.392 of 2014) Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal orders dated 20.02.2014 and made in I.A.No.26 of 2014 in O.S.No.5 of 2010, on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Tuticorin. PRAYER (in C.R.P.(PD) (MD) No.393 of 2014) Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal orders d...
The Union of India Vs. P.Deepak Singh
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :03. 04.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN WRIT PETITION No.6828 OF2014and M.P.No1. Of 2014 1. The Union of India rep. by its General Manager Southern Railway Park Town, Chennai 3.2. The Chief Personnel Officer Southern Railway Park Town, Chennai 3.3. The Divisional Personnel Officer Salem Division, Southern Railway Salem.4. The Divisional Financial Manager Salem Division, Southern Railway Salem. ... Petitioners Vs.1. P. Deepak Singh 2. The Registrar The Central Administrative Tribunal Madras Bench Chennai 600 104. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to O.A.No.71 of 2012 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, the second respondent herein and quash the order dated 16.7.2013. For Petitioners : Mr.M.Udhaya Kumar For Responden...
P.Jayadevan Vs. the State Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 3-4-2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN WRIT APPEAL No.918 of 2010 P.Jayadevan .Appellant vs 1.The State Government Rep. By its Secretary to Government Housing and Urban Development Department Fort St. George, Chennai 9 2.The Tamil Nadu Housing Board Rep. By its Managing Director Nandhanam, Chennai 35. 3.The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition Officer) Tamil Nadu Housing Board Bagalur Road, Hosur 635 109 .Respondents Writ appeal preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of this Court dated 29.3.2010, made in W.P.No.13800/2008. For Appellant : Mr.V.Raghavachari For Respondents : Mr.V.Subbiah Special Government Pleader for RR1 & 3 Mr.S.Gomathinayagam Additional Advocate General-III Assisted by Mr.C.Kasirajan for R2 JUDGMENT M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J. The writ petitioner is the appellant and W.P.No.13800/2008 has been filed by him for quashment of ...
S.D.K.Rajan Vs. 1.Jeddiya Sathya @ Sathya,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03/04/2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI Writ Appeal (MD)No.212 of 2014 and Writ Appeal (MD)No.335 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014 in W.A.(MD)No.212/2014 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1&2 of 2014 in W.A.(MD)No.335/2014 S.D.K.Rajan ...Appellant in WA2122014 & 15th Respondent in WA3352014 & 14th Respondent in W.P.Rev.Devaraj Gnanasing ...Appellant in WA3352014 & 16th Respondent in WA2122014 & 16th Respondent in W.P.Vs 1.Jeddiya Sathya @ Sathya, S/o.M.Sathya ..1st Respondent in both the WAs/ Petitioner 2.The Superintendent of Police, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin. 3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sathankulam, Tuticorin District. 4.The Inspector of Police, Nazareth Police Station, Nazareth, Tiruchnedur Taluk, Tuticorin District. 5.The Pastorate chairman, Nazareth Pastorate, Dasan Street, Nazareth, Tiruchendur Taluk, Tutitocirn District. 6.The Diocese Treasurer, T...
K.Kuppuraj Vs. M.Rajasulochana
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE:03. 04-2014 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN C.M.A.NO.604 OF2007K.Kuppuraj .. Appellant Versus M.Rajasulochana .. Respondent Prayer: This Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree in H.M.O.P.No.382 of 1999, dated 24.6.2005 passed by the Family Court, Coimbatore. For Appellant : Mr.Rajnish Pathiyil For Respondent : No appearance JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises out of the judgment and decree, in H.M.O.P.No.382 of 1999, dated 24.6.2005 passed by the Family Court, Coimbatore, whereby the petition filed by the appellant, for grant of divorce, under Section 13(i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, i.e. on the ground of 'cruelty' and 'desertion'.2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to this appeal are as follows: The marriage between the appellant/husband and respondent/wife took place on 5.4.1993 at Sri Ethiraj...
M/S. Saint GobaIn Glass India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Apr-02-2014
1. Appellant filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No.7/2006 (M-IV), dated 31.01.2006. By the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand of duty on merit, but, revised the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Revenue filed appeal against modification of the amount of penalty, which was decided by the Tribunal vide Final Order No.40151/2014, dated 24.02.2014, whereby the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded back to Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the matter afresh in respect of imposition of penalty under Section 11AC. The present appeal is filed by the appellant against the same order against the demand of duty along with interest and the penalty. 2. After considering the submissions of both sides, I find that the Tribunal in its Final Order dated 24.02.2014 set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision. I find that the assessees appeal was not drawn to the a...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-i Vs. M/S. Kalpana Lamps and C ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Apr-02-2014
1. None appears on behalf of the respondent despite issue of notice. 2. Heard the learned Authorised Representative on behalf of the Revenue and perused the records. 3. The respondent is engaged in the manufacture of Fluorescent Tube Lights (dutiable) and General Lighting Service lamps (NIL duty) classifiable under Heading No.85.39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They were availing Cenvat credit benefit. A Show Cause Notice dated 26.03.2001, was issued proposing an amount of Rs.30,94,760/- for the clearance of General Lighting Service lamps during the period from March, 2000 to Jan. 01 under Rule 57AH of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and penalty. It has been alleged that the respondent were manufacturing exempted and dutiable finished products and they have contravened the provisions of Rule 57AD of the erstwhile Rules insofar as they have not reversed the credit on certain inputs used in the m...
M/S. Reliable Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Apr-02-2014
1. After hearing this matter at length, I find that the appeal may be decided at the stage of stay petition hearing. Accordingly, after disposing the stay application, the appeal is taken up for hearing. 2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Synthetic Adhesive, Relacryl, Relasin etc. There is a demand of duty on the basis of variation in the value of sales figure as reported in Profit and Loss Account and Sales Tax Returns with ER-1 returns for the years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of duty of Rs.2,53,070/- along with interest and penalty. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. 3. It is seen from the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellant took the plea that the reported difference in the value of their Profit and Loss Account and ER-1 returns are due to the fact that the exported goods were not properly accounted. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the appellant failed to produce su...
Selvi J.Jayalalitha Vs. State by Superintendent of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-02-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:02. 04.2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESAN Crl.A.No.597/2000 1.Selvi J.Jayalalitha 2.N.Sasikala 3.J.Elavarasi Appellants 1to3/A1, A2, A4 4.Master J.Vivek 4th Appellant Vs State by Superintendent of Police Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai Respondent Prayer:- This Criminal Appeal is filed against the order made in Cr.MP.No.419/1998 in Special CC.No.7/1997 dated 17.7.2000 by the learned Special Judge I/XI Additional Judge, Chennai-1. For Appellants : Mr.C.Manishankar For Respondent : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, APP JUDGEMENT This Criminal Appeal is filed, challenging the order dated 17.07.2000 made in Cr.MP.No.419/1998 in Special CC.No.7/1997, by the learned Special Judge I/XI Additional Judge, Chennai-1, attaching certain properties of the Appellants in pursuance of GO.Ms.No.574 Public (SC) Department dated 03.04.1998.2. The properties, set out in Annexure-I, Items 1 to 34, which includes gold and silver wares, vehicles, b...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »