Chennai Court March 2017 Judgments
Subramani and Others Vs. Sarasu and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2017
(Prayer: This Memorandum of Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and decree dated 20.10.2010 passed in A.S.No.5 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Tiruchengode confirming the judgment and decree dated 27.08.2008 passed in O.S.No.186 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Tiruchengode.) 1. In this second appeal, the defendants 1 to 4 have impugned the Judgment and decree dated 20.10.2010 passed in A.S.No.5 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Tiruchengode confirming the judgment and decree dated 27.08.2008 passed in O.S.No.186 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Tiruchengode. 2. The suit has been laid by the plaintiffs for declaration and permanent injunction as regards Item No.1 of the suit properties and declaration of their easementary rights as regards Item Nos.2 and 3 of the suit properties and consequential permanent injunction. 3. The trial court on a consideration of the evidence adduce...
Tag this Judgment!R. Ayyasamy Vs. The Regional Transport Officer, Poonamallee, and Anoth ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2017
(Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the entire records pertaining to the memorandum of the 1st respondent under charge memo No.116051/A1/2016 dated 28.12.2016 and to quash the same.) 1. The petitioner is aggrieved against the proceedings dated 28.12.2016, issued by the 1st respondent, wherein and whereby, the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why action should not be taken against him under Section 86 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by contending that the petitioner has failed to pay the road tax periodically in respect of three lorries bearing Registration Nos. TN-12- A-7302, TN-12-E-8978 and TN-12-B-7673. 2. The petitioner has sent a reply to the show cause notice on 02.01.2017. However, before passing the final order, one of the vehicles belonging to the petitioner namely, Vehicle bearing TN-12-E- 8978 was seized by the 1st respondent and parked at the police...
Tag this Judgment!City Union Bank Ltd., Kuttalam Branch, Rep. by its Branch Manager Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2017
(Prayer: This Memorandum of Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and decree dated 31.03.2011 passed in A.S.No.72 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai confirming the judgment and decree dated 09.01.2009 passed in O.S.No.129 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Mayiladuthurai.) 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the defendant against the Judgment and decree dated 31.03.2011 passed in A.S.No.72 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai confirming the judgment and decree dated 09.01.2009 passed in O.S.No.129 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Mayiladuthurai. 2. The second appeal has been admitted and the following substantial questions of law are formulated for consideration in this second appeal: (a)Whether right of Set off can be exercised by a Banker when specific authority is given to adjust towards the loan without...
Tag this Judgment!The President, Nunakadu Panchayat, Nunakadu Vs. Arulmigu. Selliamman T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-06-2017
(Prayer: This Memorandum of Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and decree dated 03.12.2010 passed in A.S.No.76 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mannargudi reversing the judgment and decree dated 09.09.2009 passed in O.S.No.74 of 2003 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruthuraipoondi. 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the first defendant against the Judgment and decree dated 03.12.2010 passed in A.S.No.76 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mannargudi reversing the judgment and decree dated 09.09.2009 passed in O.S.No.74 of 2003 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruthuraipoondi. 2. The Second Appeal has been admitted and the following substantial question of law is formulated for consideration in this Second Appeal: (a)Whether the judgment and decree of the first appellate court in accepting the plaintiff's case are based upon the perverse findings and conclusions and misdirected ag...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Non Corporate Ward Vs. Gumanmal jain
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-03-2017
(Prayer: Tax Case Appeal has been filed under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ''C'' Bench Chennai, dated 11.05.2016 in ITA No.414/MDS/2016. M. Sundar, J. 1. This is a statutory appeal under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'IT Act' for the sake of brevity] 2. This statutory appeal under IT Act is directed against an order dated 11.05.2016 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ''C'' Bench Chennai [hereinafter referred to as 'ITAT' for the sake of brevity] in ITA.No.414/MDS/2016. 3. It is necessary to set out the factual matrix in a nutshell for better appreciation of our order. 4. Factual Matrix: (i) In the instant case the assessee is an individual. (ii) Assessee filed his return of income on 01.07.2013 for Assessment year 2012-13 declaring a total income of Rs.2,49,980/- (iii) The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the IT Act was issued a...
Tag this Judgment!Vendhar Movies, Rep. by S. Madan, Chennai Vs. S. Mukundchand Bothra, R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-03-2017
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 37(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking to set aside the Arbitration Interim Award dated 08.10.2016 passed by the Sole Arbitrator in I.A.No.2 of 2016 in Arbitration Case No.1 of 2016.) 1. Exercising powers under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ), the learned Arbitrator granted interim injunction in I.A.No.2 of 2016 in Arbitration case No.1 of 2016, restraining the respondent/appellant in C.M.A., from releasing the Tami Movie title Mottai Siva Ketta Siva , till the disposal of the arbitration proceedings. 1.1. Originally, there was an interim order on 08.06.2016 and later on, it was extended till the disposal of the arbitration proceedings on 08.10.2016. 1.2. Execution proceedings have already been taken in E.P.No.141 of 2016 pending before the Original Side of the High Court, Madras. 2. One of the creditor, namely, M/s.Futhra Finance has filed C.M.P.No.4079 of 2017, pra...
Tag this Judgment!P. Mugendiran and Another Vs. The Joint Director (Higher Secondary), T ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-03-2017
(Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.19887 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned transfer order passed by the 1st respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.049797/W2/E1/2015 dated 08.09.2016 (served to the petitioner on 03.10.2016) and the consequential relieving order passed by the 4th respondent in her proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 161 of 2016 dated 03.10.2016 and quash the same as illegal. Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.21806 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.No.049797/W2/E1/2015 dated 08.09.2016 and the consequential relieving order passed by the 3rd respondent in her proceedings in Na.Ka.No.150 of 2016 dated 16.09.2016 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 1st respondent to pose the petitioner in the 3rd respondent school.) Common Or...
Tag this Judgment!K. Murugan and Others Vs. Dr. V.K. Marimuthu and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-03-2017
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2015, passed in A.S.No.16 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Court, Theni 2 reversing the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2014 passed in O.S.No.120 of 2011, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Theni.) Common Judgment 1. The Second Appeal in S.A.(MD)No.358 of 2015 arises against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.16 of 2014, on the file of the Principal District Court, Theni, reversing the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.120 of 2011, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Theni. The first defendant is the appellant and the first respondent is the plaintiff and the respondents 2 to 7 are the defendants 2 to 7 in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.120 of 2011 for declaration and permanent injunction. 2. The Second Appeal in S.A.(MD)No.359 of 2015 arises against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.17 of 2014, on the file of the Pri...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. A. Michaelraj Vs. The Secretary to the Government, Higher Educatio ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-03-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the communication of the 3rd respondent made in Na.Ka.No.35044/G4/2016 dated 28.11.2016 to the 5th respondent and consequential order passed by the 5th respondent University made in Ref.Dean CDC/MKU/2016 dated 15.12.2016 as well as the communication of the 4th respondent made in Na.Ka.No.8515/Oo2/2016 dated 12.01.2017 to the 6th respondent and quash the same.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking to quash the communication of the 3rd respondent dated 28.11.2016 in Na.Ka.No.35044/G4/2016 sent to the 5th respondent and the consequential order passed by the 5th respondent University in Ref.Dean CDC/MKU/2016 dated 15.12.2016 as well as the communication of the 4th respondent made in Na.Ka.No.8515/Oo2/2016 dated 12.01.2017 to the 6th respondent. 2. The 3rd respondent vide communication dated 28.11.2016 informed the 5th respondent th...
Tag this Judgment!India Cements Ltd. represented by its General Manager (Legal Affairs) ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-03-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the respondents made in his proceedings No.C.No.6901/2005 A dated Nil-07-05, signed on 1.7.2005, confirmed by subsequent correspondence made in C.No.D1/9274/2004 dated 28.05.2007, signed on 01.06.2007 and quash the same and direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and mining operations of the petitioner in 96.71 hectares of Thalaiyuthu Reserve Forest area covered under G.O. No.148 dated 18.06.1989. 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings dated Nil-07-05 of the District Forest Officer, Tirunelveli Division, the third respondent herein, signed on 01.07.2005 and confirmed by the very same authority by subsequent correspondence dated 28.05.2007, signed on 01.06.2007 and for a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and mining operations of the petitioner in 96...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »