Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad582
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is an appeal by the decree-holder in O. S. No. 781 of 1933, District Munsif Court, Nellore, against the order of the District Judge, Nellore, dated 7th October 1947, in A. S. 111 of 1947 on his file, setting aside the Kavali District Munsif's order, dated 13th December 1946, in E. P. No. 48 of 1946, in O. S. No. 781 of 1933, and dismissing the execution petition as barred by limitation, as the order of the District Munsif, Nellore, dated 27th January 1936, in EX. P. 5 (a), directing simultaneous execution in his Court as well as the District Munsif Court, Kavali, had been passed without notice to the judgment-debtors and was illegal and would not serve as a step-in aid of execution and save limitation regarding the subsequent execution petitions, including E. P. No. 48 of 1946, under the rulings in Gurudas Adbya v. Jnanendra Narain : AIR1935Cal268 and Lakshman Hari Kanhere v. V. G. Virkar : AIR1939Bom258 .2. I have perused the entire records, and heard ela...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1994)IMLJ438
..... guidelines is said to suffer from the same vice and consequently the forums under the act cannot be held to possess the power to punish for offences. 15. mr. r. gandhi, learned senior counsel appearing for some of the petitioners, contended, apart from adopting the submissions of the other learned counsel, that the constitution of the forum with a majority of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1996)ILLJ376Mad
..... so long those directions have not been withdrawn or varied, the respondent -board is bound by the same, and cannot on its own, act in derogation thereof.8. mr.r.gandhi, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners in some of the writ petitions, while adopting the contentions raised by mr. k.chandru, also contended that the apprentices who have been .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1996(2)CTC232
ORDERN. Arumugam, J.1. In ordering notice of motion of the present revision case filed by the complainant/petitioner who lost the case before the trial court viz., VII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras in Crl.MP.No.1910 of 1995 in CC.No.4166/94 dated 21.4.1995 which application was filed for the discharged of the respondent/accused under Section 239, Cr.P.C. for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), I have heard both parties on merits and as consented to by them I have disposed this revision on merits.2. The petitioner has alleged in the complaint before the court below that the respondent being the accused has availed the financial assistance from the petitioner company for the export of marine products and have been doing the business and that in the due course of the same for the sums due and payable in part a cheque drawn by him for a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 on 25.4.1994 in favour of the complainant was given...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1997)ILLJ170Mad
Janarthanam, J.1. Certain events and incidents, which formed the backdrop and setting of the present actions - Writ Appeal No. 332 of 1994 and Writ Petitions Nos. 3124, 3125 and 3917 of 1993 better it is, we feel, to relate to have a proper understanding and fine grasp, with ease and grace - of the legal implications or positions to be derived or to flow from the factual matrix, giving rise to certain issues - so moot and complicated in nature - with which, we are now called upon to decide, by giving our anxious consideration. E.I.D. Parry (India) Limited (for short,'the employer') has one of its units located at Ranipet in the State of Tamil Nadu, where sanitary ware, superphospate and insecticides are manufactured. Some of its retired employees filed applications under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act No. 14 of 1947 - for, short, 'the I.D. Act'), before the Labour Court, Madras, claiming pension by alleging that pay ability of pension was a condition of servi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1998(2)CTC313
ORDER1. The petitioner had entered into an agreement with the first respondent on 24.4.1991 for executing a work of strengthening the weak two lane road reach from KM40/0-52/8 NH5- MC Road including providing of Hard shoulders. That agreement contains arbitration clause which reads as follows:'The arbitrator for fulfilling the duties set forth in the arbitration clause of the standard Preliminary Specification shall be Superintending Engineer of Madurai CMH Circle.Time shall be considered as of the essence of the agreement and the Contractor hereby agrees to commence the work as soon as agreement is accepted by competent authority as defined by the Madras Public Works Department Code. The site (or premises) is handed over to him as provided for in the said condition and agrees to complete the work within eighteen months from the date of such handing over the site (or premises) and to show progress as defined in the tabular statement 'rate of progress' below, subject nevertheless to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1997(3)CTC739; (1998)IMLJ258
..... advocate for respondents 1 to 3.10. learned senior counsel mr. r. gandhi has submitted that the first respondent had exceeded in his jurisdiction while allowing the revision petition by confirming the order of the third respondent. according to him if the remand ..... ground the respondent herein submitted that there is no merits in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.9. i heard learned senior counsel mr. r. gandhi on behalf of m/s. r.g. narendhran and ors. for the petitioner and mr. alagirisamy, learned senior counsel for mrs. bagirathinarayanan on behalf 5th respondent and the learned government .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1997)2MLJ151
..... , wherein a division bench of this court, in a similar situation, has struck down the supersession of the co-operative societies following the dictum of the supreme court in indira gandhi v. raj narain : [1976]2scr347 and held that supersession of elected body on the ground of mis-management without any enquiry would amount to legislative judgment or bill of attainder ..... on the ground that the said act interfered with the scheme decree framed by the supreme court, which was governing the trust.46. our attention was also drawn to indira gandhi case : [1976]2scr347 on the point of legislative judgment or bill of attainder. the learned counsel for the petitioners particularly relied on paragraphs 321 to 329 in that decision regarding .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1998(3)CTC753
..... natural justice is toprevent miscarriage of justice one tails to see why those rules should be made inapplicable to administrative enquiries. (italics supplied as in the original textbook)in maneka gandhi, : [1978]2scr621 , kailasam, j. pronounced:'the frontier between judicial or quasi-judicial determination on the one hand and an executive on the other has become blurred. the rigid view that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1998(3)CTC1; (1998)IIMLJ580
ORDERJudgement Pronounced by Shivaraj Patil, J.1. These cases are placed before us for disposal on reference made by a Division Bench of this Court on 10.1.1996.2. The question that came up for consideration before the Division Bench was, whether the canteen run in the second respondent factory, which is statutorily obligatory, can be treated as part and parcel of the establishment of the management, or it can be treated as an independent entity, not coming under the management, and thereby the workmen working therein not becoming the members of the establishment of the management.3. A Division Bench of this Court, in Workmen Employed in the Canteen Run by S.R.F. Ltd., Madras v. Government of Tamil Nadu and others, 1995 (1) L.L.N. 487 took the view that the canteen is run by the contractor or a co-operative society; the employer in relation to the workers engaged in the canteen will be the contractor or the society, as the case may be, and not the proprietor of the factory, and in such...
Tag this Judgment!