Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: competition amendment act 2007 section 8 amendment of section 10 Court: chennai madurai Page 7 of about 114 results (0.061 seconds)

Mar 14 2016 (HC)

M. Jahir Hussain Vs. State rep.by The Inspector of Police

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... by reason of mental retardation, he or it shall not hold the trial and order the accused to be dealt with in accordance with section 330.] amendment act, 2008.- clauses 25 and 26 amend sections 328 and 329 related to procedure of enquiry and trial in case of person of unsound mind. the clauses provide that if the magistrate finds that ..... accused himself has reported that he is suffering from mental disease. further he would say in his evidence that even at the time of giving treatment, the first accused has acted as a normal man. therefore, the evidence adduced on the side of the first accused (both oral and documentary) for proving his alleged insanity cannot be accepted. 20. ..... . 28. the specific evidence given by pw8, post-mortem doctor is that the deceased died of head injury. therefore, the court cannot come to a conclusion that the act of the first accused would come within the purview of section 323 of the indian penal code. 29. as stated in many places, the first accused has also been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 2016 (HC)

Prabhakaran and Others Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Than ...

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... the witnesses and thereafter, they can be permitted to cross examine the witnesses. 8. the learned trial judge shall bear in mind that section 154 of the indian evidence act has been amended and even if the witnesses turn hostile during cross examination, the trial judge can appreciate their evidence in the chief examination and pass a judgment in accordance with law ..... same. 2. the petitioners are facing trial in s.c.no.242 of 2015 for offences under sections 294(b) and 506(i) ipc and section 3(1) of tnppdl act before the additional assistant sessions judge, thanjavur. the prosecution examined p.ws.1 and 2 in chief on 22.12.2015 and the petitioners did not cross examine them. thereafter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 2016 (HC)

Nagappan and Another Vs. M.B. Ajith and Another

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... , on the file of the motor accident claims tribunal, kulithalai. 2. it is a case of a fatal accident caused on account of an accident took place on 13.09.2007 around 8.15 a.m. near dharmapuri to vellampatty road. the legal heirs of the deceased filed an application seeking compensation before the motor accident claims tribunal, kulithalai inmcop.no ..... (prayer: civil miscellaneous appeal filed under section 173 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 against the judgment and decree made in m.c.o.p.no.26 of 2008, on the file of the motor accident claims tribunal, kulithalai, dated 22.07.2010.) .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 15 2016 (HC)

Ashokan (died) and Another Vs. The Managing Director, Maruthupandiar T ...

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... the apex court, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant. it is more relevant at this juncture to point out that in the case reported in (2007) 3 scc 538, new india assurance co.ltd vs. kalpana, it was categorically held that, in the absence of any definite material about the income, monthly contribution to the family ..... would have earned a lucrative income by then. in this context, he referred to the case law in new india assurance co.ltd vs kalpana (smt) and others reported in (2007) 3 scc 538, to highlight the proposition laid down by the hon'ble apex court to the effect that, even in the absence of any definite material about the income ..... (prayer: this civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed under section 173(1) of motor vehicle act against the judgment and award dated 06.05.2004 made in m.c.o.p.no.83/09 on the file of the motor accident claim tribunal (chief judicial magistrate) .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 2016 (HC)

Petitioner Vs. Respondent

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... refiling the appeal papers within time. the respondents only attempted to throw the blame on the previous counsel to whom appeal papers were entrusted for filing in september 2007. as pointed out by the learned senior counsel for the appellant(s), there were no details as to whom it was entrusted and what were the steps ..... the authority found that the applicant was guilty of gross negligence. he took no steps whatever to carry out the amendment for several months after the order permitting the amendment, and thereafter, when the case was at the final stage, he suddenly woke up, as it were, from slumber, and sought to ..... period of limitation and on the aspect of delay, the hon'ble supreme court observed thus:- .the authority is competent to devise, consistently with the provisions of the act and the rules made thereunder, its own procedure based on general principles of justice, equity and good conscience. one of such principles is that delay defeats equity. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2016 (HC)

Vedam Vs. Arulanandam @ Arul and Another

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... and decree dated 29.12.2008 made in a.s.no.19 of 2008 on the file of subordinate judge, uthamapalayam, confirming the judgment and decree dated 25.10.2007 made in o.s.no.71 of 2006 on the file of district munsif, uthamapalayam. 2. the respondents, as plaintiffs, filed the suit for declaration, declaring that ..... , assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest of any immovable property, it must be properly stamped and duly registered as per the indian stamp act and indian registration act. if the family arrangement is stamped, but not registered, it can be looked into for collateral purposes. a person cannot claim a right or title to a ..... properties indifferent shares and allotment thereof to the various members, if the same is reduced to writing, it requires registration under sec.17 (1) (b) of the act." their lordships have also held that an unregistered partition deed though not admissible to prove the terms of the partition can be admitted in evidence for proving the stages ( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 21 2016 (HC)

Nehru Vidhyasalai Hr. Sec. School Vs. The Secretary to Government, Edu ...

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... they complete the age of 14 years and this should be done within a period of 10 years from the commencement of the constitution. article 45 was amended by the 86th constitution amendment act, 2002 and it reads the state shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of 14 year ..... became a fundamental right to the children between the age group of 6 to 14. thereafter, parliament enacted the right of children to free and compulsory education act, 2009 (hereinafter called rte act ) with the object of providing free education, which came into force from 01.04.2010. 5.1. with the view to improve the quality of ..... case of society for unaided private schools of rajasthan vs. union of india, 2012 (6) scc 1. the apex court while upholding the constitutional validity held that the act is applicable to all schools, except the unaided minority schools. 5.4. in the case of pramati educational and cultural trust vs. union of india, 2014 (4) mlj .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 2016 (HC)

Jamuna Vs. Rajkumar

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... madurai bench of madras high court, has observed as below:- ''18.it is true that section 19 of the hindu marriage act, has been amended by insertion of proviso of (iii)(a) to section 19. of course, this amended section 19(iii)(a) gives special preference to the wife to file a petition or defending the case of the husband before ..... by women in the matter of initiation of matrimonial proceedings. the report submitted by the law commission as well as national commission for women, underlying the need for such amendment so as to enable the women to approach the nearest jurisdictional court to redress their matrimonial grievances, were also taken note of by the government. therefore such a ..... court, trichy, to be tried along with m.c.no.118 of 2015.) 1. the case of the petitioner is that she married the respondent on 13.09.2007 as per the hindu rites and customs at karur. the respondent failed to maintain the petitioner and the petitioner filed maintenance case no.118 of 2015 before the family .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 2016 (HC)

P. Vani Vs. C. Manikandan

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... in the matter of initiation of matrimonial proceedings. the report submitted by the law commission as well as national commission for women, underlying the need for such amendment so as to enable the women to approach the nearest jurisdictional court to redress their matrimonial grievances, were also taken note of by the government. therefore such ..... bench of madras high court, has observed as below:- ''18.it is true that section 19 of the hindu marriage act, has been amended by insertion of proviso of (iii)(a) to section 19. of course, this amended section 19(iii)(a) gives special preference to the wife to file a petition or defending the case of the husband ..... party is immaterial in a case like this. in case the marriage was solemnized under hindu law marital relationship is governed by the provisions of the hindu marriage act. therefore, section 19 has to be given a purposeful interpretation. it is the residence of the wife, which determines the question of jurisdiction, in case the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2016 (HC)

L. Pushparaj Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Additional Chief ...

Court : Chennai Madurai

..... they complete the age of 14 years and this should be done within a period of 10 years from the commencement of the constitution. article 45 was amended by the 86th constitution amendment act, 2002 and it reads the state shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of 14 year . ..... became a fundamental right to the children between the age group of 6 to 14. thereafter, parliament enacted the right of children to free and compulsory education act, 2009 (hereinafter called rte act ) with the object of providing free education, which came into force from 01.04.2010. 6.1. with the view to improve the quality of ..... 02.2014, under which, the minimum marks to be obtained by various categories were prescribed was also quashed by the hon'ble division bench. the constitutional validity of rte act was under challenge before the supreme court in the case of society for unaided private schools of rajasthan vs. union of india, 2012 (6) scc 1. the .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //