Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-29-1995
Reported in : 1996CriLJ2938
ORDER1. Petitioner K.M. Rafiudeen alias Rafique, sons of Kajamoideen, preferred this Habeas Corpus petition on 7-9-1995 when he was detained in Central Prison, Madras, praying for issue of a habeas for production of himself and two others, Menakshisundaram alias Sundar and Setharaman, similarly remanded and kept in Central Prison, Madras, so that they could be set at liberty. He has further made a plea for award of compensation as well for directions for initiation of appropriate legal proceedings, against erring officials of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, T. Nagar, Madras. In the affidavit sworn to by the petitioner in support of his prayer, he has stated that he was renamed to judicial custody on 31-8-1995 in R.R. No. 93/95 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, E.O.I., Egnore, Madras, at or about 7-15 p.m., along with Meenakshisundaram alias Sundar and Sethuraman. The remand report produced before the Magistrate pleading for judicial custody relies up...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-16-1995
Reported in : (1996)IMLJ465
K.A. Swami, C.J. 1. When the L.P.A. came up for hearing before this Court on March 8, 1995, Writ Petition No. 11680 of 1993 was directed to be posted along with L.P.A. Accordingly, both the matters are posted together and the learned counsel appearing on both sides in both the matters are heard. 2. As the decision in the writ petition will have a bearing on the L.P.A., we first take up the writ petition for consideration. 3. The petitioners have sought for quashing the order of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Madras-17 (first respondent) bearing R.C. No. 2057/92/C-4, dated February 25, 1993 and also the order dated April 28, 1993 passed by the Special Officer. The Kancheepuram Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Kanchecpuram (second respondent), insofar as they relate to the denial of backwages. 4. The first respondent has passed the aforesaid impugned order in the purported, exercise of his powers under Sec. 181 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative-Societies Act, 1983 (...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-16-1995
Reported in : (1996)1MLJ465
K.A. Swami, J.1. When the L.P.A. came up for hearing before this Court on 8.3.1995, Writ Petition No. 11680 of 1993 was directed to be posted along with L.P.A. Accordingly, both the matters are posted together and the learned Counsel appearing on both sides in both the matters are heard.2. As the decision in the writ petition will have a bearing on the L.P.A., we first take up the writ petition for consideration.3. The petitioners have sought for quashing the order of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Madras-17 (first respondent) bearing R.C. No. 2057/92/C-4, dated 25.2.1993 and also the order dated 28.4.1993 passed by the Special Officer, The Kancheepuram Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Kancheepuraam (second respondent), insofar as they relate to the denial of back wages.4. The first respondent has passed the aforesaid impugned order in the purported, exercise of his powers under Section 181 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 (Tamil Nadu Act of 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-16-1995
Reported in : 1995(2)CTC260; (1996)IMLJ84
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. This appeal is by the second defendant in C.S.No. 636 of 1995 on the file of the Original Side of this Court against the order dated 30-6-1995 made in O.A.No. 509 of 1995 restraining him from infringing in any manner the plaintiffs registered trade mark 'THE MAIL' by use of the trade mark 'Trinity Mail' or any trade mark incorporating the word 'MAIL'. The parties in this appeal will be Deferred to by their rank in the suit for the sake of convenience.2. The plaintiff has averred in the plaint as follows:- The plaintiff is the proprietor of the trade marks 'THE MAIL' and 'THE WEEKLY MAIL' registered under Nos. 115521 and 115522 respectively dated 27th November, 1945 in Class 16 in respect of News Papers and printed publications. The Registration has been duly renewed from time to time and is still valid and subsisting. The title 'THE MAIL' has also been registered with The Registrar of Newspapers for India. A declaration has been filed before the Chief Metropolitan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-11-1995
Reported in : AIR1996Mad262; 1996(2)CTC22; (1995)IIMLJ492
1. This Second appeal is by the wife who was the respondent in H.M.O.P. No. 4 of 1988, on the file-of Sub Court, Nagapattinam.2. The husband, the respondent herein, filed the above application for divorce on the ground that the appellant is leading an adulterous life. 3. The marriage between the parties took place on 2-9-1960, and out of the wedlock, three children were born, a son and two daughters. Both the daughters are married and the son is also self-employed. It is at that time, the respondent (husband) has filed the petition for divorce, alleging adultery on the part of his wife. 4. The material averments regarding adultery as stated in the application are as follows : 'The petitioner was having acquaintance with one Vairakkannu, a teacher working in a school at Kariakattu Street, Tiruvarur. He used to visit the sweet stall and look after the business of the petitioner as a friend. In course of time, he gained confidence with the petitioner. The petitioner possessed of Nanja lan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-12-1995
Reported in : 1995(2)CTC383
ORDERJagadeesan, J.1. The petitioner has filed these writ petitions to quash the criminal complaint in C.C.No. 43 and 44 of 1995 on the file of the first respondent. The said complaints have been filed by the second respondent herein.2. The second respondent had inspected the Government Hospital, Dindigul and took the vials of two injections, one is Oxeteracycline I.P. and the other is Adernaline I.P. on 28.10.93 for test. After following the formalities, he had sent the samples to Government Analyst for report. By report dated 23.8.94, the Government Analyst had informed that the said medicines are 'not of standard quality'. Thereafter, show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner herein. The petitioner had sent a reply. It is admitted, due to his own mistake intyping the address, the replied were not reached the second respondent. The second respondent filed two complaints in respect of two medicines against the petitioner for violation of Section 18(a)(i) and 18B of the Drugs and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-09-1995
Reported in : (1995)2MLJ622
Mishra, J.1. The appellant in O.S.A. Nos. 82 to 88 of 1993 has moved the petition, seeking inter alia to modify our order and judgment dated 27.7.1994 in the said appeals in terms of the compromise memorandum in C.S. Nos. 1246 and 1247 of 1992 and Petitions to implead Sterling Newspaper Limited, Bharatkatha Publications Private Limited and Bharatkatha Offset Private Limited as defendants in C.S. No. 1246 of 1992, to pass an order to transfer the suit C.S. Nos. 1246 and 1247 of 1992 from the file of the Original Side to the file of the Appellate Side for the purpose of recording the compromise. The last prayer, which is also covered by separate petitions filed on behalf of the appellant in the suits is wholly uncalled for and should not have been made at all. The prayer to implead Sterling Newspaper Limited, Bharatkatha Publications Private Limited and Bharakatha Offset Private Limited as defendants 15 to 17 in the suits is also not warranted. We have however to see in the instant proce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Feb-24-1995
Reported in : 1995CriLJ2754
ORDER1. This writ petition by a RAJYA SABHA MEMBER and Secretary of the Tamil Nadu State Committee of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), filed as a public interest litigation, is against respondents 1 and 2, who are State of Tamil Nadu, represented by two different Secretaries, 3rd respondent, who is the District Forest Offcer, Harur Division, Dharmapuri District, 4th respondent, who is Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmapuri District and the 5th respondent, who is the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Harur. It prays for a Mandamus to direct the respondents to hold an enquiry into the happenings, commencing from 20-6-1992 and the consequent suffering undergone by the Villagers of Vachathi, a small Tribal Village in the abovesaid Harur Taluk. It also prays that upon considering the abovesaid enquiry report, for taking appropriate penal action against the delinquent personnel and for compensating the victims. It also prays for an enquiry being held on the wider question of smuggling ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-09-1995
Reported in : (1996)130CTR(Mad)157; [1995]215ITR853(Mad)
Mishra, J.1. The assessee claimed assessment under s. 7(4) of the WT Act, 1957, before its repeal and substitution by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989, w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. The CWT, however, exercised the power under s. 25(2) of the Act, called for and examined the records of the proceedings, found that the order passed by the Assessing Officer(AO) was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and after hearing the assessee and enquiry set aside the assessment order and remitted the matter to the WTO (the assessing authority) to redo the assessment in accordance with law. The assessee appealed to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has set aside the CWT's order and restored the assessment. The Revenue has since obtained a reference under s. 27(1) of the Act on the question whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it can be said that the house was exclusively used by the assessee for residential purposes throughout the period of 12 months immediatel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-25-1995
Reported in : [1996]219ITR39(Mad)
Thanikkachalam, J.1. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the income of Rs. 3,87,832 being the net collections on the three days on which the races were conducted for the benefit of the Chief Minister's Relief Fund and the Beggars' Rehabilitation Fund should not be treated as the income of the Race Club ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the surplus in the Race Club Accident Fund should not be treated as the assessee's income ?' 2. The assessee is a limited company carrying on the business of conducting horse-racing. For the assessment year 1972-73, it returned a business income of Rs. 16,35,320. The Income-tax Officer made certain additions and computed the total incom...
Tag this Judgment!