Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1993)IILLJ911Mad
ORDER1. The petitioner joined the service of the respondent-bank as Clerk-cum-Godown Keepar in the year 1960. He was promoted as an Officer and posted to Chetpet Branch on April 15, 1972. He was subsequently transferred as acting Accountant to Thousand Lights Branch at Madras and later transferred to Pondicherry. He was promoted as Manager in the month of September 1975. In December 1979, one T. K. Subramaniam was posted as Branch Manager, Pondicherry and the petitioner was served with an order of transfer as Manager, Chengalpattu Branch during February 1980. Subsequently the order of transfer was cancelled and the petitioner was served with an order of suspension dated March 24, 1980. Certain allegations were set out in the order of suspension and it was stated that if proved they would constitute misconduct. A Memorandum of Articles of Charge dated February 24, 1982 was issued to the petitioner. It was alleged that he was guilty of misconduct under Regulations 3(1), 14(1) and 15(1) o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1992)IIMLJ168
Misra, J. 1. This appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment in Application No. 6887 of 1990 in C.S. No. 1307 of 1990, granting interim injunction restraining the appellant/respondent, its agents, men and representatives from using the name of 'Indian Institute of Human Resources Development' in their business and passing off teaching materials in that name, which, according to the respondent/applicant-plaintiff is deceptively similar to 'National Institute of Human Resources Development' a proprietary concern of the respondent plaintiff. 2. In the plaint in C.S. No. 1307 of 1990, the plaintiff/respondent has claimed that it had conceived of a new educational project and evolved a new original orientation of both the subjects of study and methods of instruction of inventive nature and designed the institution 'National Institute of Human Resources Development' in the context of national objectives of education and training for simultaneous development...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1993)2MLJ50
ORDERA.R. Lakshmanan, J.1. W.P. No. 3642 of 1992: The petitioner is the Secretary of the Pondicherry Bar Association. He filed the above writ petition on behalf of the Bar Association, which according to the petitioner, is devoted to act in furtherance of the interest of the Bar, Judiciary and the Rule of Law with a view to achieve justice to the litigant public, with the following prayer:To issue a writ in the nature of a certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order, calling for the records relating to the Order No. 59/SPA/ 92-LD, dated 27.2.1992 on the file of the 4th respondent and G.O.Ms. No. 31/84/LLD, dated 2.7.1984 on the file of the 4th respondent and to quash the same and to pass such further or other order as this Court may deem fit and proper.2. The petitioner filed W.M.P. No. 19852 of 1992 to amend the prayer in the writ petition, which is as follows:To issue a writ in the nature of a certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order, calling for the records relating t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1993(64)ELT399(Mad)
ORDER1. In these writ petitions common questions are raised challenging the orders passed by customs authorities on the basis that Tariff Heading 98.01 does not apply to the photographic machinery imported by the petitioners in view of the definition of 'industrial plant' in the Project Imports Regulations, 1986 which came into force on April 3, 1986. In three of the writ petitions which were filed in 1986 long before the other petitions were filed, some additional contentions are advanced resting on an interpretation of the said Regulations and the doctrine of promissory estoppel. 2. The three writ petitions filed in 1986, are at the instance of the same person with reference to the same import. The petitioner is a partnership ..... manufacture of colour film, processing and printing and enlargement of the same as a Small Scale Industry. It placed an order for import of two mini colour laboratories from Japan, one for their factory in Madras and the other for their branch in Madurai a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1993)2MLJ311
Srinivasan, J.1. A 'Introduction: In these writ petitions, the Constitutional validity of G.O.Ms. No. 536, Education (UI) Department, dated 17.5.1989 and G.O.Ms. No. 661, Education (UI) Department, dated 12.6.1991 is challenged mainly on the ground that they violate the rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution of India and they offend the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. By the two Government Orders the State Government introduced certain amendment to the Tamil Nadu Minority Schools (Recognition and Payment of Grant) Rules, 1977 approved in G.O.Ms. No. 2080, Education, dated 14.9.1977. Before referring to the provisions thereof and the contentions of the parties, a brief peep into the history is necessary. [After tracing the history of the impugned G. Os. and the compelling circumstances under which they were issued, His Lordship proceeded -Ed.] 2. By the said Government Order (G.O.Ms. No. 536) the Tamil Nadu Minority Schools (Reco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1993)2MLJ647
ORDERSrinivasan, J.1. Petitioner is a private limited company having registered office and factory in the State of Karnataka. The petitioner is manufacturing transformer oil as per Indian Standard 335 -1983 for the past 22 years, the petitioner is supplying transformer oil to most of the Electricity Boards in India besides transformer manufacturers. Insofar as the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, who is the first respondent herein is concerned, the petitioner has been supplying oil since 1985 on orders placed by the first respondent. In the year 1991 the transformer oil supplied to the first respondent by the petitioner has been certified to be the best for electrical characteristics by Central Power Research Institute, Bangalore. The first respondent issued an advertisement in the newspapers on 26.10.1991 calling for tenders for the supply of new transformer oil and the total value of the tender was approximately Rs. 3.5 crores. The petitioner participated in the tender and offered to su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1995Mad205
ORDERK. A. Swami, CJ.1. The first three writ appeals are preferred against the common order dated 19-7-1991 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petitions 9909 to 9911/91, whereas Writ Appeal 1111 of 1993 is preferred against the order dated 21-9-1993 rejecting W.M.P. 16050 of 1993 filed in Writ Petition 10498 of 1993. When Writ Appeal 1111 of 1993 came up for consideration, it was brought to our notice that Writ Appeals 1011 to 1013 of 1991 also involve the same point and are concerned with the validity of the permits granted in favour of the 1st respondent in each one of the appeals. It was also submitted that the arguments in Writ Appeal 1111 of 1993 and Writ Petition 10498 of 1993 will be the same. Therefore, we directed the writ appeals 1011 to 1013 of 1991 and Writ Petition 10498 of 1993 be posted with Writ Appeal 1111 of 1993.2. All these matters had come up on anearlier occasion for hearing, but at the requestof the learned counsel appearing for thegrantees of the permits...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1994]80CompCas531(Mad); (1995)IILLJ1208Mad
Mishra, J. 1. The first respondent has filed C.A. No. 206 of 1992 and C.A. No. 207 of 1992, the first in his individual capacity and the second in his capacity as the vice-president of the Madras Pen and Ink Factories Workers' Union. A learned single judge of this court has in the applications held that (i) the workmen, who become secured creditors by operation of law from the date of the winding up order, have a pari passu charge over the security which is held by the secured creditors under the contract; (ii) the cut-off date for arriving at the ratio at which the sale proceeds should be divided on a pari passu basis as per section 529 of the Companies Act, 1956, should be the date of the winding up order and not the date of sale; and (iii) the workmen are entitled to claim interest from the date of the winding up order till the date of realisation of security. He (the learned single judge) has set aside the order of the official liquidator determining the closure compensation and th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1994)2MLJ281
Srinivasan, J.1. It is time we lifted the Language curtain which has descended crise-cross across India so that the Indian can understand another Indian. St. Paul said in his First Epistle to the Corinthians (XIV. 11), 'Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a common tongue, whatever it be. We may take pride in our mother tongue. We may in the locality, town or region from where we come. But let us above all prides take pride in being Indians.' So said Madon, J. in G.K. Dudani v. S.D. Sharma : [1986]2SCR250 . But, the patriotic wisdom enshrined in the above observation does not help us in this case in deciding the validity of a legislative enactment and a Governmental notification issued thereunder. We have to bear in mind that courts cannot substitute their social and economic beliefs for the judgment of the legislative bodies. We have to decide this case by constitutional measurement free of emoti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1996Mad29
ORDERSomasundaram, J.1. In all these writ petitions the petitioners are dealers engaged in purchase and sale of various agricultural produces and they challenge the various provisions of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1987, and certain rules in the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Rules, 1991 which have been brought into force with effect from 1st February, 1991. Inasmuch as the points raised and claims made in all the above writ petitions are similar, all the writ petitions were heard together and they are disposed of by this common order.2. Marketing legislation in the State of Tamil Nadu was the subject matter of several reports of Expert Committee appointed by the Government and the Expert Committee after careful examination found that the agricultural producers were largely illiterate and economically weak and were not having the facilities to dispose of their produce to their best advantage without being exploited by middleme...
Tag this Judgment!