Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-11-2000
Reported in : 2000(4)CTC556; (2001)ILLJ285Mad
ORDERJudgement pronounced by N.K. Jain, CJ.1. These W.P.Srs. have been posted before us to get an authoritative decision as to whether writ petitions, challenging the orders passed under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act are maintainable.2. We will now advert to the facts in detail, as to how the matter, now being referred to us, had been set at naught by two Full Bench decisions of this Court3. In the year 1989, a Full Bench of this Court, in R.Thamilarasan Etc., P.Kannan Etc., v. Director of Handlooms and Textiles, Madras and others,1989 (1) LLJ 588, while deciding the issue as to whether a writ will lie against Co-operative Society, rendered a finding in negative, holding that no writ is maintainable against Co-operative Society, because it is not a statutory body or an authority or agency or instrumentality of the State, under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Subsequently, a Division Bench of this Court in the decision in Natarajan, A. v. The Registrar of Co-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Sep-20-2000
Reported in : I(2001)DMC156; 2001AIHC1567
ORDERK.P. Sivasubramaniam, J. 1. In the above Transfer C.M.P. the petitioner seeks for a transfer of H.M.O.P. No. 4 of 2000 on the file of the Sub-Court, Chidambaram to the Court of Additional District Judge, Karaikal, for trial.2. According to the petitioner, she was married to the respondent on .11.1997 at Karaikal. She was presented by her father with 22 sovereigns of gold, silver vessels worth about Rs. 12,000/-, stainless steel worth about Rs. 3,000/- among other things. The marriage was also performed on a grand scale by spending about 2.5 lakhs. Thereafter, they were living together at Chidambaram, where the respondent was employed- Ever since the marriage, the respondent was not treating the petitioner properly and she was kept like a slave and even her parents were not allowed to meet her. Her entire salary was taken by the respondent and she was not given anything even for her personal expenses. She had to resign the job at Chidambaram and got herself employed as a staff nurs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Sep-08-2000
Reported in : 2000(2)CTC609
ORDER1. All these writ petitions challenge the constitutional validity of Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 (Tamil Nadu Act XIV of 1997). Hence, they are dealt with in a common judgment.2. For the convenience I shall refer the facts narrated by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.4157 of 1998. The petitioner Thiru Muruga Real Estate started its business in the year 1984. Vast extent of properties were purchased and layout formed and sold to public for construction of houses. For the past few years, the Real Estate Market was going down by 30 to 40 per cent and there are no immediate purchasers. The petitioner's firm was formed on 18.4.1994 as a Sister concern for the Thiru Muruga Real Estate to accept deposit from the public. Deposits were accepted both by the petitioner-firm and also by the Real Estate entity Thiru Muruga Real Estate. From 15.4.1995 deposits were received and within a short span of time, a total of 2.75 crores were...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-26-2000
Reported in : [2000(87)FLR760]; (2000)IILLJ1646Mad
Prabha Sridevan, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in this writ appeal is whether the Christian Medical College Hospital attached to the Christian Medical College at Vellore is a 'hospital' for the purpose of application of the provisions of Minimum Wages Act, 1948, or is it an 'Educational Institution'.2. The appellant is an Association registered under the Societies Registration Act to establish, maintain and develop the Christian Medical College and Hospital in India, where students shall receive education of the higher quality, in the discipline of medicine. The: history of the Medical College and Hospital is the history of what started as a one bed clinic in 1900 by a woman with vision of Dr. Ida Scudder which grew into a forty bed hospital in two years. Since the founder of this Institution wished to train women doctors in 1906, a nurses training course was started and in 1980, a medical school for women was born. Forty two years after the birth of the one bed clini...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-21-2000
Reported in : [2000]245ITR800(Mad)
N.K. Jain, Actg. C.J.1. The matter has been referred to us by a Division Bench of this, court, before which the tax reference came up for hearing, as it was not inclined to agree with the decision rendered by an earlier Division Bench of this court in the case of CWT v. V.T. Ramalingam : [1993]201ITR839(Mad) , and felt that the matter requires reconsideration by the Full Bench. Accordingly, to have an authoritative view of law, the following question of law has been referred for our consideration : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of the provision of Section 7(4) of the Wealth-tax Act even though the assessee was not the owner of an independent residential unit exclusively used by her for residential purposes ?' 2. The necessary facts in brief which give rise to the question are as under: The assessee, an individual, filed the returns for the assessment years 1979-80 and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-21-2000
Reported in : [2001]245ITR800(Mad)
N. K. Jain, Actg. C. J.The matter has been referred to us by a Division Bench of this court, before which the tax reference came up for hearing, as it was not inclined to agree with the decision rendered by an earlier Division Bench of this court in the case of CWT v. V. T. Ramalingam : [1993]201ITR839(Mad) , and felt that the matter requires reconsideration by the Full Bench. Accordingly, to have an authoritative view of law, the following question of law has been referred for our consideration :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of the provision of section 7(4) of the Wealth Tax Act even though the assessee was not the owner of an independent residential unit exclusively used by her for residential purposes ?'The necessary facts in brief which give rise to the question are as under:2. The assessee, an individual, filed the returns for the assessment years 1979-80 and 198...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-14-2000
Reported in : AIR2000Mad497
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. Britannia Industries Limited having its Registered Office at Calcutta, the plaintiff herein, pending the suit in C. S. No. 939 of 1999 seeking the relief of permanent injunction, mandatory injunction, etc. has filed three applications in O.A. Nos. 742, 743 and 744 of 1999 praying for interim reliefs as against Sara Lee Bakery India Private Limited, Chennai, the defendant herein.2. The prayer in O.A. No. 742 of 1999 is to grant interim injunction restraining the respondent/defendant from committing the acts of piracy of the applicant's registered design of its biscuits by the manufacture of the impugned product 'Milk Wala' 'Milk Cream Biscuits' bearing the design which is identical with or similar to the applicant's design.3. In O.A. No. 743 of 1999 the relief sought for is for the grant of interim injunction restraining the respondent from reproducing and publishing the biscuit wrapper which is deceptively similarly or reproduction of the features of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-20-2000
Reported in : 2002ACJ1203; AIR2000Mad305; (2000)IIMLJ414
S.S. Subramani, J.1. Defendants 3 and 4 in O.S. No. 46 of 1993, on the file of Sub Court, Sivagangai, are the appellants herein.2. Parties hereinafter will be referred to according to their rank in the suit.3. Material facts which are necessary for proper disposal of the second appeal could be summarised thus :--First plaintiff is the husband, and plaintiffs 2 to 4 are the children of late Panchavarnam, who died on 3-1-1990. Plaintiffs allege that late Panchavamam gave birth to the fourth plaintiff on 4-12-1989. Second defendant in the suit, who is a motivator to encourage birth control operations, persuaded Panchavamam to have family planning operation, and she was admitted at Paganeri Government Hospital. On 14-12-1989, i.e. ten days after the delivery, Panchavamam was operated. Plaintiffs allege that on the same day, she was discharged from the hospital without being given any instructions regarding the follow-up action, and within two days, Panchavamam felt some pain in her abdomen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Feb-18-2000
Reported in : 2002ACJ954; AIR2000Mad340; (2000)IIMLJ772
I. David Christian, J.1. Suit for damages.Plaint allegations briefly stated are as follows :--Plaintiff is a citizen of India and hails from Guwahati in Assam. She was given in marriage to one Tapan K. Dutta, who is a resident of United States of America. After living in United States of America of some years, the plaintiff along with her husband proceeded to Saudi Arabia and the husband is gainfully employed in Saudi Arabia. The plaintiff is residing with her husband in Saudi Arabia and she is a house wife looking after the house and taking care of her husband and children. By about 1986, the plaintiff developed certain gynaecological problems. When she consulted Doctors, they diagnosed that the plaintiff is having a cyst in one of her ovaries, for which they prescribed certain treatment. Even after she took medicines, she was feeling discomfort and the Doctors abroad advised her to go in for removal of uterus, a surgery known in medical terms as Hysterectomy. It was suggested that on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Feb-16-2000
Reported in : 2000(3)CTC663
ORDER1. Second defendant in O.S.No.13752 of 1996, on the file of the V Assistant City Civil Judge, Madras, is the appellant herein.2. Suit filed by plaintiff is for the following reliefs:-'....to pass a decree(a) declaring that the correct date of birth of the plaintiff is 13.7.1941;(b) granting a mandatory injunction directing the defendants 1 and 2 to amend the date of birth of plaintiff as 13.7.1941 in the records maintained by the 1st defendant in the Secondary School Leaving Certificate and all also on the service register of the plaintiff maintained by the 2nd defendant respectively;(c) to direct the defendants to pay the costs; and(d) to pass such or other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.'3. Material averments which necessitated the filing of the suit could be summarised thus:-It is the case of the plaintiff that he was born on 13.7.1941 at Arakkonam North Arcot Ambedkar District, and both his parents are now on more. He was a stu...
Tag this Judgment!