Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indo tibetan border police force act 1992 chapter i preliminary Court: chennai Page 3 of about 34 results (0.173 seconds)

Mr.S.Anand @ Akash Vs. Ms.Vanitha Vijaya Kumar and anr.

Court : Chennai

..... the first respondent and her parents. therefore, any right thinking individual would try to save his minor child out of such an imbroglio. even according to the first respondent's police complaint, she entrusted the child to the applicant on 7.11.2010, at least for a temporary period, because of the trauma that the entire family underwent due to unprecedented ..... the respondents shifted back to india in may 2010, the relationship between the first respondent and her parents got strained, leading to the first respondent filing police complaints against her own parents and her parents filing police complaints against the second respondent. it is on record that from 7.11.2010 till december 2010, the minor son became a victim of as .....

Kothari and Sons (industries) (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. M.V. Subramaniam, ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1998]233ITR294(Mad)

..... prescribed in ss. 244 to 247 of the code. to be precise, the judge has to try the case according to the procedure prescribed for cases instituted otherwise than on police report.' 21. the case law decided by my learned brother arunachalam j. in s.a.r. somasundaram vs. cit : [1992]197itr26(mad) , is also relevant to be quoted in the ..... framed or not is required to be made on the basis of the record of the case, including documents and oral hearing of the accused and the prosecution or the police report, the documents sent along with it and examination of the accused and after affording an opportunity to the two parties to be heard. the stage for discharge under s ..... .pc : 'a plain reading of sub-s. (1) of s. 244 of the cr.pc clearly leads to the fact that in a warrant case instituted otherwise than on a police report like the one in the instant case by the it authorities before the learned judicial magistrate, no. 1, in the context, the accused appears or is brought before him .....

Micromeritics Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. S. Munusamy

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [2003]116CompCas465(Mad); (2002)3MLJ83

N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. The appeals are filed against the order of the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, sitting at Chennai dated 21.5.2000 made in C.P.Nos.68 and 69 of 1998. The respondents in C.P.No.69 of 1998 are the appellants in C.M.A. No.923 of 2000 and the respondents in C.P.No.68 of 1998 are the appellants in C.M.A.No.924 of 2000. The petitioner in C.P.No.69 of 1998 is the respondent in C.M.A.No.923 of 2000 and the petitioner in C.P.No.68 of 1998 is the respondent in C.M.A.No.924 of 2000.2. The appeals deal with two companies, viz., M/s.Micromeritics Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and M/s.Microparticle Engineers Pvt. Ltd. As far as Microparticle Engineers Pvt. Ltd. is concerned, it was incorporated on 13.1.1992 under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'). The respondent in C.M.A.No.924 of 2000, by name, Senthamarai Munusamy along with S.Sounder, the second appellant and one Nalini Chandrasekar were holding shares in the said company and all of them were holdi...

Bader Sayeed Vs. the Southern India Education Trust and Others

Court : Chennai

..... be treated as public interest writ petition, at paragraphs 54 to 64, held as follows: 54. here is a case where no information has been given to the police by any informant alleging commission of any cognizable offence by the appellant and the persons associated with the appellant institution. it is a peculiar case of its own kind where ..... take such steps as he may deem fit to prevent harassment of woman and within the precinct; (b) on a complaint made by an aggrieved person, give information to the police about harassment of woman which may extend on two thousand rupees. (2) any person who fails to take action under sub-section (1) shall be liable to fine. 69 ..... hon'ble chief minister of tamil nadu, seeking protection. a complaint has been registered against the said medical officer in crime no.267 of 1997 on the file of ariyalur police station under sections 341, 352 and 506(ii) ipc. it was also alleged that the said medical officer used abusive words. though an enquiry was ordered, it was .....

The Registrar, University of Madras, Chepauk, Madras - 600005 and Othe ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1995)IIMLJ367

ORDERSrinivasan, J. 1. Broadly stated, two contentions are mainly urged in this batch of writ petitions, one relating to the validity of some of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act No. 68 of 1986), (hereinafter called 'the Act'), and the other relating to the applicability of the Act to imparting of education and matters connected therewith. It is only in W.P. No. 6447 of 1993, a prayer is made for declaration that Sections 10(1)(b) and (c), 13(3), (4) and (5), 14(1)(c), 16(1)(b), 20(1)(b) and 27 and other provisions of the Act as unconstitutional, ultra vires and unenforceable. In all the other Writ Petitions the prayer is for either issue of Writ of Prohibition prohibiting the Consumer Forum from dealing with the specified complaint or for issue of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records and quash the orders passed by the Consumer Forum on specified complaints. 2. The petitions can be classified into three groups :- A. Writ Petitions filed by Educational Ins...

Emjey Enterprises Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 1998(61)ECC50

..... if the import policy prevailing at the time of import permitted them to import items falling under such category. this was also viewed in that light in the case of indo afghan chambers of commerce : 1986(10)ecc131 (supra).23. mr. habibullah badsha learned senior counsel for the petitioner sought to distinguish the decisions of the supreme court on the ground ..... reliance on a decision of the supreme court in the case of union of india v. godrej soaps pvt. ltd. : 1986ecr1(sc) and another decision of the supreme court in indo afghan chambers of commerce v. union of india : 1986(10)ecc131 and submitted that the petitioner was not entitled to import under the import policy, 1982-83 though the said .....

Consim Info Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Google India Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Chennai

..... more easily than the same can be resolved in the virtual world of internet. this is primarily because of the fact that the virtual world has no geographical limitations or borders, but the laws relating to protection of trademarks are normally country specific or region specific and confined to specific boundaries. the system of allocating rights in names, works reasonably well .....

A. Rajalakshmi and Others Vs. Sengammal and Others

Court : Chennai

(Prayers: A.S.No.589 of 1994: Appeal under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, made in O.S.No.110 of 1991, dated 5.4.1994. CMP No.10569 of 1996: Petition under Section 107(2), CPC, to direct that the date of filing of the suit wrongly shown as 18.1.1974 in the decree be corrected as 28.1.1991. CMP No.17037 of 2000: Petition under Order 41, Rule 27, CPC, to receive as additional evidence, document marked Ex.A, registration copy of Partition Deed dated 6.2.1970, Document No.1719 of 1970 and Document marked Ex.B, registration copy of purchase document dated 15.12.1962, Document No.1927 of 1962. CRP No.3542 of 2000: Revision petition under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the order dated 27.10.2000 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge in E.P.No.97 of 2000 in I.A.No.1338 of 1995 in O.S.No.110 of 1991 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore and dismiss the aforesaid E.P.No.97 of ...

C.Balakrishnan Lr.S. and Others Vs. Thittakavi Anantha Padmanabhamoort ...

Court : Chennai

..... and an outhouse in adi seshayya street, satyanarayanapuram, vijayawada, andhra pradesh. (2) a house site of about four grounds in plot no.a4a, ashok pillar road, ist avenue, (next to police quarters), kodambakkam, madras. (3) a house site of about 520 sq. yds. in yellareddiguda, hyderabad, lying to the east of smt.suryakantham's house. (4) about 1/3rd acre of ..... magistrate and also observed that the encroachment was made by mr.veda arun nagarajan or any other third party in the subject premises shall be removed by the commissioner of police greater chennai within two weeks. 20(b). the purchaser filed a civil suit in c.s.no.699 of 2009 before this court praying interim injunction against the respondents 2 .....

The Registrar, University of Madras and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1995)2MLJ367

Srinivasan, J.1. Broadly stated, two contentions are mainly urged in this batch of writ petitions, one relating to the validity of some of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act No. 68 of 1986), (hereinafter called 'the Act') and the other relating to the applicability of the Act to imparting of education and matters connected therewith. It is only in W.P. No. 6447 of 1993 a prayer is made for declaration that Sections 10(1)(b) and (c), 13(3), (4) and (5), 14(1)(c), 16(1)(b), 20(1)(b)) and 27 and other provisions of the Act as unconstitutional, ultra vires and unenforceable. In all the other writ petitions the prayer is for either issue of writ of prohibition prohibiting the Consumer Forum from dealing with the specified complaints or for issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records and quash the orders passed by the Consumer Forum on specified complaints.2. The petitions can be classified into three Groups:A. Writ Petitions filed by Educational Institutions:...