Court : Chennai
COMMON ORDER P. JYOTHIMANI,J. The issue involved in all these cases relates to the commissioning of Units 1 and 2 of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (for brevity, "KNPP"). Even though the prayers in these writ petitions are different, they are taken up together, since the issue is one and the same. W.P.No.24770 of 2011 2.1. This writ petition is a public interest litigation. The petitioner, who is an Engineering Graduate in Electronics and Instrumentation, claims to be a trustee of a public trust called "Poovulagin Nanbargal", which is connected with environmental and other issues. After coming to know from the newspapers that the Government of India, represented by the Department of Atomic Energy will commission the KKNPP by November, 2011, he has filed the said writ petition for a direction against respondents 1 and 3 to undertake a fresh and transparent review of KKNPP at Kudankulam, Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu by an independent body of experts, including those of the Departme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
R.SUBBIAH, J., 1. This is an application filed by the plaintiffs to pass an order of interim injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing, selling, offering and advertising for sale, using the trade mark AGREEGOLD upon the goods P.V.C.Pipes, Rigid P.V.C.Pipes and tubes or in any media and use the same in Invoices, letter heads and visiting cards or any other trade literature or by using any other trade mark which is in any way visually, phonetically or deceptively similar to the applicants' registered trade mark AGRIGOLD under Nos.935848, 935849, 1051706, 1051758, 1051769, 1174585, 1174586, 1174587, 1174588, 1174589, 1174590, 1174592, 1174594, 1174595, 1174599, 1174600, 1174602, 1174603, 1174605, 1174607, 1174608, 1296901, 1176229 or in any manner infringing the applicants' aforesaid registered trade marks by using the mark AGREEGOLD either as prefix or suffix in the course of business pending disposal of the suit. 2. It is the case of the applicants/plaintiffs that the 1st ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer in both the O.Ps: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records, quash the private complaints in S.T.C.No.68 of 2012 and S.T.C.No.71 of 2012 respectively for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track Court), Hosur.) Common Order 1. Whether a Public Charitable Trust is a juristic person and a company in terms of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is the issue involved in these petitions. 2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 3 to 9 in S.T.C No.71 of 2012 as well as in S.T.C. No.68 of 2012 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track Court), Hosur. Seeking to quash the said cases, the petitioners have come up with these Criminal Original Petitions. The common respondent in these Criminal Original Petitions is the complainant in both the cases before the Trial Court. 3. Since common issues have been raised in both these ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the communication of the 1st respondent dated 01.01.2010 in SIET Ref.No.6473/10/2010, and quash the same and direct the 1st respondent to constitute a Committee as per Vishaka's judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to enquire into the allegations made against the respondents 3rd and 4th under the circumstances stated above.) 1. A practising Advocate and Joint Secretary of SIET, Chennai, has challenged the communication of the 1st Respondent dated 01.01.2010 in SIET Ref. No. 6473/10/2010 and sought for a direction to the first respondent to constitute a Committee as per Vishaka's Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to enquire into the allegations made against the Respondents 3 and 4. 2. On the basis of the pleadings and the material on record, in the form of Typed Set of papers filed by the contesting parties, Learned Senio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the respondent in proceedings Nil, dated 11.06.2010 and subsequent notion in proceedings Na.Ka.2297/A2/2010, dated 29.07.2010 and quash the same, as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction.O R D E R1. Challenge in this writ petition, is to the competence of a Block Medical Officer, who exercised the power under the Tamil Nadu Public Health Act, 1939, and other provisions of the Act, and closed down a Hospital, named "Get Well", Tirukoilur. The Hospital, where treatment was given, began unwell on 11.06.2010, when it was found difficult in meeting out certain defects, alleged to be violations and consequently, sealed. Another proceeding impugned in this writ petition is to the order, rejecting the request of the petitioner to open the hospital.2. According to the petitioner, he has completed bachelor of Homeopathy Medicine and Surg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
J U D G M E N T1. The Hon ble the Chief JusticeSince, in all these writ appeals, which are 27 in number, a common question of interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 and the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act 20 of 1999 has to be answered, they have been heard together and answered by this common judgment. All these appeals arose out of separate judgements delivered by learned single Judges in various writ petitions filed by aggrieved land owners. Almost all the writ petitions have been allowed mainly on the ground that physical possession of the lands continued with the land owners or the persons claiming through them. The factual details of each case have been discussed in the latter part of this judgment.2. The State, which is the appellant in all but three appeals, has assailed the impugned judgments rendered by the writ courts as being illegal and wholly without jurisdiction. Mr. S. Gomathinay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to remove the encroachments made in Plot No.290A, Avvai Nagar, (New ASTC HUDCO), Hosur-635 109, Dharmapuri District by the 3rd respondent or any other person and retain the above said plot as park as per the site plan of Tamilnadu Housing Board, Hosur Housing Unit approved by the Director of Town and Country Planning.O R D E R1. Temple, constructed in a place earmarked for a park under a Scheme, is being used as a shield, against the law of encroachment.2. Petitioner has sought for a mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to remove the encroachments made in Plot No.290A, Avvai Nagar, (New ASTC HUDCO), Hosur-635 109, Dharmapuri District by the 3rd respondent or any other person and retain the above said plot as park as per the site plan of Tamilnadu Housing Board, Hosur Housing Unit approved by the Director of Town and Country Plannin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Prayer in W.P.No.798 of 1992 : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order vide ka.No.G.24205/91 dated 19.06.1992 passed by the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Madras-600 005, the respondent herein. Prayer in W.P.No.799 of 1992 : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Declaration, and to call for the records relating to the impugned G.O.2555 of the Revenue Department, dated 14.056.1973 and declare that the impugned G.O. Namely G.O.Ms.No.2555 dated 14.05.1973 of the Revenue Department as illegal and null and void.C O M M O N O R D E R1. In W.P.No.798 of 1993, VDSR Re-rolling Mill, represented by its Partner, Rajendra Kumar, Thiruvanamalai District, has sought for a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records, relating to the impugned order, vide Ka.No.G1 24205/91, dated 19.0...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in No.46896/EW1/2010 dated 22.03.2011 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to issue appointment order and training to the petitioner to the post of Grade II Police Constable/Jail Warden/Fire Servicemen for the year 2010.ORDER1. Seeking to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in Proceedings No.46896/EW1/2010 dated 22.03.2011, quash the same and for a consequential direction to the respondents to issue appointment order and training to him to the post of Grade II Police Constable/Jail Warden/Fire Serviceman for the year 2010, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.2. Facts of the case as put forth in the affidavit accompanying this petition, would run thus :(i) The petitioner has passed 12th Standard in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Prayer: PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the entire records related to the Petitioner's husband's detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order, dated 16.9.2011 on the file of the Second Respondent herein made in proceeding No.303/BDFGISSV/2011, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the detenu K.Dhanasekaran, Son of Mr.Karuppathevar, before this Hon'ble Court and set the detenu at liberty, who is now detained in Central Prison, Vellore. ORDERM.VENUGOPAL,J.1. The Petitioner (wife of the detenu) has filed this Writ of Habeas Corpus Petition praying for issuance of a direction to call for the entire records related to her husband-K.Dhanasekaran's detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 as per detention order, dated 16.9.2011 on the file of the 2nd Respondent made in Proceeding No.303/BDFGISSV/ 2011 and to quash the same as illegal.2.T...
Tag this Judgment!