Chennai Court April 2014 Judgments
Periyakkal Vs. Inspector of Police at D3 Ice House Police Station
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-2014
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Date:29. 04.2014 Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Dhanapalan and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice G. Chockalingam H.C.P.No.2308 of 2013 Periyakkal ... Petitioner -vs- 1. The Inspector of Police, D-3, Ice House Police Station, Chennai 600 005.2. The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai 8.3. The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Chennai 600 009. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce petitioner's son Muthu KUmar, male, aged about 23 years, son of Ponnusamy, detained under Act 14/82 vide order No.1111/2013 dated 24.09.2013 and now confined at Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai before the Court and set him at liberty forthwith by call for the records and setting aside the order of detention bearing No.1111/2013 dated 24.09.2013 on the file of the 2nd respondent. For Petitioner - Mr.S.Senthilvel F...
Tag this Judgment!P.K.Pounraj Vs. State Rep.by Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: .04.2014 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. SELVAM CRL.O.P.No.9400 of 2011 P.K.Pounraj .. Petitioner vs. 1.State represented by Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Coimbatore. 2.MPS Steel Casting (P) Ltd., represented by M.Paramsivam, 476, Wise Park, Palacode 678 621. .. Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for records in Crime No.33 of 2011 on the file of the first respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Gopinath, Senior counsel for Mr.M.Gopinathan For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias, Additional Public Prosecutor (R1) Mr.A.Ramesh, Senior counsel for Mr.D.Raja (R2) ***** ORDER Petitioner seeks to quash proceedings in Crime No.33 of 2011 on the file of the first respondent.2. Pursuant to direction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. of learned Judicial Magistrate I, Coimbatore and at the instance of the second respondent, the case in Crime No.33 of 2011 on the file of the first respondent stands registered...
Tag this Judgment!Maideen Beevi Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-2014
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Date:29. 04.2014 Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Dhanapalan and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice G. Chockalingam H.C.P.No.2492 of 2013 Maideen Beevi ... Petitioner -vs- 1. The Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.2. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to call for the entire records of the respondents leading to the detention of the husband of the petitioner namelyh Mohammed Sulaiman @ Sulaiman, S/0 Adamsha under Act 14 of 1982 as Goonda vide detention order No.BDFGISSV/No.1057/2013 dated 20.09.2013 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to set the detenu at liberty from the Central Prison, Puzhal. For Petitioner - Mr.V.Parthiban For Respondents - Mr.P.Govindarajan ...
Tag this Judgment!K.Dhanakumar Vs. District Revenue Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :29. 04.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.3916 of 2009 K.Dhanakumar .. Petitioner -vs- 1. The District Revenue Officer Coimbatore District Coimbatore 2. The Sub-Collector Pollachi 642 001 3. The Tahsildar Pollachi 642 001 4. Kuppathal 5. S.V.Subbaiah (RR4 & 5 impleaded as per order dated 26.3.2009 in M.P.No.4 of 2009 in W.P.No.3916 of 2009) .. Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the first respondent herein comprised in his proceedings in Na.Ka.39680/2008/A1-2 dated 27.1.2009 and quash the same. For Petitioner :: Mr.Madan for Mr.Sathish Parasaran For Respondents :: Mr.A.Kumar Special Government Pleader for R1 to R3 No appearance for R4 & R5 ORDER The present writ petition is directed against the impugned order passed by the first respondent-District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore in Na.Ka.No.39680/2008/A1-2 dated...
Tag this Judgment!The Special Officer, S.1143, Kothur Primary Agricultural Co-operative ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-2014
(The Respondents are the complainants filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying certain reliefs. The District Forum Allowed the complainant. Against the said order the appellant / opposite party filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.10/2011, dated 28.12.2011. This appeal coming before us for final hearing on 21.03.2014 and heard 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, Presiding Judicial Member The opposite party is the appellant. 2. The 1st complainant served in the opposite party Kothur Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit society from 01.10.1972 to 30.11.2010 and retired from service on 30.11.2010 on superannuation. This complaint has been filed through Tamil nadu Consumer Association, Namakkal which has been arrayed as 2nd complainant. The Special Officer of the said...
Tag this Judgment!K. Mahendran Vs. Dr. V. Srinivasan
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-2014
(The appellant is the complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum against the opposite party praying certain reliefs. The District Forum dismissed the complainant. Against the said order the appellant / complainant filed this appeal praying to setaside the order of the District Forum in CC.No.22/2008, dated 15.07.2009. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 20.03.2014, 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, Presiding Judicial Member The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. 2. The complainant being a tailor in profession met with an accident on 02.07.2006 and sustained fracture in right leg for which undergone surgery in the opposite partys hospital and stayed about 10 days as an inpatient and subsequently developed pain and was not able to move at all and undergone another surgery at Rex Ortho Hospital due...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. F.L. Smidth Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce, Trichy
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-2014
1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of parts of pre-heater and cleared the same to M/s. Dalmia Cements (Bharat) Ltd. on the basis of contract. They are also undertaking trading activities. They availed input service credit paid on commission in respect of procurement of orders. A show-cause notice dated 28.11.2006 was issued proposing to deny input service credit of Rs.17,21,791/- being the amounts of wrong availment on service tax credit taken on the service tax paid on the materials procured and supplied under trading activities in the month of February 2005. It has also proposed demand of interest along with penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of tax along with interest and also imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- and the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. 2. The learned counsel on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant used the credit in respect of business activities. He submits that the definition of input service under ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai Vs. Nivaran Herbal Products Pv ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-2014
Pradip Kumar Das, J. 1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the penalty from Rs.12,18,630/- to Rs.1,00,000/- imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. The Ld. Authorized Reprehensive on behalf of appellant-Revenue submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand of duty and liability of the penalty under Section 11AC of the Act. He submits that in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. - 2009 (238) ELT 3 (SC), the Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to reduce the penalty. 3. None appears on behalf of the respondent. 4. After considering the submissions of Ld. Authorized Representative on behalf of Revenue and, on perusal of the records, I agree with the submission of Ld. A.R that in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills (supra), the C...
Tag this Judgment!The Divisional Manager, Vs. 1.Tamilarasi, W/O.(Late) Ramasamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :28.04.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI Civil Appeal (MD)No.202 of 2012 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013 The Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance Company Ltd., No.77/78, North Car Street, Sivakasi..Appellant/ 2nd Respondent Vs 1.Tamilarasi, W/o.(Late) Ramasamy 2.Naveen Kishore, S/o.(Late) Ramasamy 3.Jeyanthi Kishore, S/o.(Late) Ramasamy..Respondents 1 to 3/ Petitioners 4.Suresh Kumar, S/o.Raman ..Respondent-4/ 1st Respondent (Respondents 2 and 3 are declared as majors majors as per orders dated 03.04.2012 and 03.10.2013 in MP(MD)No.2/2012 and 2/2013, respectively) Prayer Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the Award and Decree, dated 11.04.2011, made in MCo.No.7 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub-Court).Sivakasi. For Appellant : Mr.B.Vijay Karthikeyan For Respondents : Mr.D.Sakkaravarthi 1 to 3 :JUDGM...
Tag this Judgment!Tamilnadu Fire Works and Vs. 1.The Secretary to Government,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-28-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :28.04.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI Writ Appeal (MD)No.1167 of 2012 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 of 2012 Tamilnadu Fire Works and Amorces Manufacturers Association, Rep.by its President S.S.Vijayakumar, ".TANFAMA Centre"., 442, Kamarajar Road, Sivakasi-626 123..Appellant/ Petitioner versus 1.The Secretary to Government, Department of Labour and Employment, Fort St.George, Chennai-600009. 2.The Director, Industrial Safety & Heath, (formerly the Chief Inspector of Factories).No.35, Indian Officers Association Building, T.V.K.High Road, Royapettai, Chennai-600 014. 3.The Joint Director, Industrial Safety & Health, (formerly Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, Sivakasi and Virudhunagar Divisions, Virudhunagar. 4.The Deputy Director, Industrial Safety & Health, (formerly Inspector of Factories, Sivakasi..Respondents/ Respondents (Cause title of respondents 2 t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »