Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: chennai Year: 1998 Page 3 of about 141 results (0.137 seconds)

Apr 30 1998 (HC)

Srinivasan and Six Others Vs. Sri Madhyarjuneswaraswami, Pattaviathala ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-30-1998

Reported in : 1998(1)CTC630; (1998)IIMLJ722

orderjudgement pronounced by d. raju, j.1. the above second appeals were placed before us under the orders of the honourable the chief justice pursuant to the order of reference dated 25.4.1989 made by k. venkataswami, j.,(as the learned judge then was), in view of an apparent conflict said to have been noticed by the learned judge on account of diametrically opposite views found to have been taken in two decisions reported in kannammal v. g. panchakshara chetty1988 (2) l.w. 11 rendered by e.j.bellie, j. and in ramanujam kavirayar v. sri-la-sri sivaprakasa pandara sannathi avargal1988 (2) l.w. 513 rendered by m. srinivasan, j., (as the learned judge then was). the relevant portion of theorder of reference, which explained the need and justification for making thereference reads as follows:- 'justice srinivasan has taken the view that the notification under section 3 will not have the effect of extinguishing the right in the land, but it recognises the pre- existing right. this is what the learned judge has said, on this aspects:-''...on the other hand, a reading of the provisions of the act makes it clear that there is a recognition of the pre- existing rights. the proviso to s.3 (d) of the minor inams act protects the possession of any person who is considered prima facie to be entitled to a ryotwari patta under the act pending the decision of the appropriate authority. if the act is to be construed as one wiping out all the pre-existing rights and starting with a clean .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 1998 (HC)

Ramalingam and 2 Others Vs. the Idol of Sri Thayumanasamy at Sri Thayu ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-30-1998

Reported in : 1998(3)CTC665

order1. the legal representatives of the defendant are the appellants. the respondent herein field suit o.s.no.181 of 1976 before the district munsif of kulithalai against the appellant's father vadakali muthuraja for declaration that the respondent temple had title to the suit property, for possession, for rs.4,380/- by way of accounting for the income, for future profits and for costs, averring as follows: the suit property is a nanja land of an extent of 73 cents is s.f.no.276/16. originally it was a dry land. it was comprised in inam title deed 752 and it was granted to the respondent temple. except the respondent, nobody else had any manner of right in the said property, that the suit land was inam land granted to the respondent temple could not either in fact or in law be disputed by the defendants/appellants as the minor inams were notified under act 30 of 1963 by the government on 15.2.1967. the inam settlement tahsildar initiated proceedings under act 30 of 1963 and granted ryotwari patta to vadakali muthuraja on payment of consideration due to the government, the said order was not binding on the respondent and could not affect its title to the suit property. the notification under minor inam's abolition act (act 30 of 1963), hereinafter referred to as the act, was issued on 15.2.1965. in any event, after the said date, vadakali muthuraja's possession was unlawful and he was bound to pay the income to the respondent at the rate of rs. 10 per year to the respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 30 1998 (HC)

Society of St. Joseph's College, by Its procurator, St. Joseph's Colle ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-30-1998

Reported in : 1998(2)CTC196; (1998)IIIMLJ349

order1. the defendant who succeeded before the trial court and suffered decree before the lower appellate court has filed the above second appeal.2. the respondents 1 and 2 plaintiffs claiming that they are having kudiwaram rights in the suit properties, which are their minor inam lands, filed the suit for declaration and for recovery of possession and for mesne profits, in o.s. no.961 of 1980, on the file of the learned sub-judge, tiruchirapalli. the said suit was resisted by the appellant/defendant stating that the plaintiffs are not entitled to the relief sought for as the same has already been decided by the statutory authorities, which has become final. the trial court found that the plaintiffs were having kudiwaram rights and they were in possession of the suit properties through their lessees and entitled to get kudiwaram rights in the suit lands. but, in view of the orders passed by the statutory authorities under exs.a-30 and b-l, the trial court held that the plaintiffs are not entitled for the relief sought for. aggrieved against the same, the plaintiffs filed appeal in a.s. no.151 of 1983 on the file of the learned i additional district judge, tiruchirapalli. in the said appeal, the lower appellate court found that the civil court has got jurisdiction to entertain the suit and the plaintiffs would become owners of the lands in question in view of the abolition of melwaram rights as per the tamil nadu act 30 of 1963 and so they are entitled for the declaration as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 1998 (HC)

A. Syed Anwer Ahmed Hussainy and Other Vs. the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-24-1998

Reported in : 1998(3)CTC445; (1999)IMLJ658

order1. the petitioners have filed the above revisions against the order passed in e.a.nos. 83 of 1993 and 378 of 1992 in o.s.no. 10 of 1909, on the file of the sub-court, chidambaram, dated 25.11.1998.2. one hazarath syed sha rahmathulla sahib was given certain properties in killai village, chidambaram taluk, samayapuram village, tiruchi district, and in navabpettai, chidambaram taluk by the then king. after his death, he was intered in killai village and his son syed sha edullahwas also intered after his death in navabpettai durgah. he had two sons, namely, syed sha ghulam mohideen and syed sha phool. syed sha phool had a quarrel with his father with respect to the properties and he separated himself from the family by getting 20 kani lands. the balance extent of the properties had come under the control of syed sha gulam mohideen. with a view to continue the object for which the properties were given by the original owner, the said syed sha gulam mohideen executed two documents in the year 1926 and 1939. the said syed sha gulam mohideen had three sons, namely, fariduddin athar, mohamad ghouse and gulam jeelani. the said three sons were directed to administer the three durghas at killai, navabpettai and samayapuram. there was a dispute between the parties regarding the management of the abovesaid durghas. one syed sha gulam javani sudari sahib filed the suit in o.s.no. 10 of 1909 on the file of the sub-court, mayavaram. the said suit was dismissed on 22.12.1909. thereafter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 1998 (HC)

A. Syed Anwar Ahmed Hussainy and anr. Vs. the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, R ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-24-1998

Reported in : (1999)1MLJ658

orderk. govindarajan, j.1. the petitioners have filed the above revisions against the order passed in e.a.nos.83 of 1993 and 378 of 1992 in o.s.no. 10 of 1909, on the file of the sub court, chidambaram, dated 25.11.1998.2. one hazarath syed sha rahmathulla sahib was given certain properties in killai village, chidambaram taluk samayapuram village, tiruchi district and in navabpettai, chidambaram taluk by the then king. after this death, he was interred in killai village and his son syed sha eduallh was also interred after his death in navabpettai dargah. he had two sons, namely, syed sha ghulam mohideen and syed sha phool. syed sha phool had a quarrel with his father with respect to the properties and he separated himself from the family by getting 20 kani lands. the balance extent of the properties had come under the control of syed sha gulam mohideen. with a view to continue the object for which the properties were given by the original owner, the said syed sha ghulam mohideen executed two documents in the year 1926 and 1939. the said syed sha ghulam mohideen had three sons, namely, fariduddin athar, mohammed ghouse and ghulam jeelani. the said three sons were directed to administer the three darghas at killai, navabpettai and samayapuram. there was a dispute between the parties regarding the management of the abovesaid darghas. one syed sha ghulam javani sudari sahib filed the suit in o.s.no. 10 of 1909 on the file of the sub court, 'mayavaram. the said suit was dismissed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1998 (HC)

ismail Gani Vs. Maim Ponn Pattu Beevi and Another

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-17-1998

Reported in : 1998(1)CTC735; (1998)IIIMLJ64

order1. the first defendant is the appellant. the first respondent herein filed suit o.s.no.140 of 1984 before the district munsif's court, melur, against the appellant and the second respondent for declaration and permanent injunction on the following averments:the suit property of an extent of 60 cents in r.s.no.293/2 out of a total extent of 3 acres 22 cents in nadumandalam village, natham vattam, originally belonged to her father kattuvan rowther and on his death there was a partition under a registered deed ex.a-1 on 12th april, 1956. under the partition, the suit property was allotted to the first respondent's mother ayesha beevi ammal. since the first respondent was not allotted any share in the properties of her father, the mother ayesha beevi executed a gift deed ex,a-2 dated 7.5.1964 in favour of the first respondent in respect of the property allotted to ayesha beevi. the first respondent in her turn, executed a registereddeed of maintenance under ex.a-3 dated 7.5.1984 in favour of her mother ayesha beevi, under which ayesha beevi was given a right to enjoy the income from the properties without powers of alienation during her life time and thereafter the property was to be taken by the first respondent. ayesha beevi was in enjoyment till she died on 11.11.1982 and since her death the first respondent was in possession of the suit property. as her possession was sought to be disturbed by the appellant on or about 20.4.1984, the suit came to be filed.2. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 07 1998 (HC)

Vorion Chemicals and Distilleries Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commis ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-07-1998

Reported in : (1999)152CTR(Mad)447

orderjagadeesam, 1:the petitioner has filed this writ petition to quash the order of the first respondent in his proceedings f. no. i/dec. 1985 dt. 1ith march, 1988.2. the petitioner purchased the property situated in r.s. no. 12615 (part) under a registered sale deed dt. 9th aug., 1985 for a total consideration of rs. 32,20,000 from one r.v. sarojini devi. the vendor obtained the certificate under s. 230a of the it act. the property consists of 12 grounds and 494 sq. ft. with a building of 2,200 sq. ft. in the ground floor and 800 sq. ft. in the first floor. the land attracts the purview of the land ceiling act and the petitioner has to meet the proposed land acquisition proceedings arising out of the urban land ceiling regulation act. the vendor is anyway not responsible to clear the proceedings that would arise under the land ceiling act. keeping all these in mind, the value of the property has been fixed at rs. 32,20,000 which represents the fair market value.3. the first respondent issued a notice dt. 10th july, 1986, calling upon the petitioner to produce certain documents relating to the purchase of the property. the petitioner was served with another letter from the district valuation officer, it department, madras-6 on 2nd july, 1986. the district valuation officer requested the petitioner to furnish certain documents to him on or before 14th july, 1986, on the ground that the first respondent had requested him to value the property. the petitioner furnished the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1998 (HC)

Sadakathulla Appa College Represented by Its Secretary and Corresponde ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Dec-03-1998

Reported in : (1999)1MLJ450

ordert. meenakumari, j.1. the writ petition is for the issue of writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent ending with his order no.o.mu.no. 18404/a4/89, dated 23.5.1989 and quash the same and direct the respondents 1 to 3 to pay the grant in respect of the three laboratory assistants namely, zakir hussain, s.m.a. syed mohamed and s. mohamed ibrahim appointed by the petitioner.2. the petitioner is the secretary and correspondent of sadakathullah appa college, tirunelveli. the above college was established by a society namely sadakathullah appa educational society, tirunelveli. the society is registered under the societies registration act. the college was started in the year 1971 by the members of muslim minority community for the benefit of the muslims of that particular area. the case of the petitioner is that the college is a minority institution as defined under section 2(7) of the tamil nadu private colleges regulation act, 1976 and it is a minority institution under article 30 of the constitution of india and is entitled to the rights guaranteed under article 30(1) of the constitution of india. the government of tamil nadu passed an act called the tamil nadu private college regulation act, 1976 in order to provide for regulation of private colleges in the state of tamil nadu. the reason for the passing of that act is to regulate the condition for the service of teachers employed in the private colleges and to make the regulation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 30 1998 (HC)

T. Pramod Wilson and 3 Others Vs. Dr. Hari Ramesh

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-30-1998

Reported in : 1999(1)CTC732

order1. the above revision is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14.7.1998 made in rca.no. 337 of 1991 on the file of the learned rent control appellate authority (vii judge, small causes court) madras, setting aside the order of the eviction dated 6.12.1990 made in rcop.no. 1727 of 1988 on the file of the learned rent controller (xi judge, small causes court), madras. 2. the brief facts of the case are stated as follows: the landlords were the revision petitioners who filed the above rcop.no. 1727 of 1988, seeking eviction of the respondent-tenant, under section 10(2)(i) of the tamil nadu buildings (lease and rent control) act, (hereinafter referred to as the act), on the ground of wilful default for non-payment of rent for the period from january 1987 to march 1988, at the rate of rs. 3,000 per month. 3. according to the revision petitioners, the petition premises namely door no. 224, indira nagar, 4th avenue, madras-20 originally let out to the respondent-tenant, by one t.j.m. wilson, father of the revision petitioners, for a monthly rent of rs. 3,000 for non-residential purpose, namely to run a clinic. t.j.m. wilson, father of the revision petitioners died on 10.12.1986. after his death, the revision petitioners have become entitled to receive the rent along with their mother smt. indira wilson. smt. indira wilson died on 17.12.1987 and thereafter, the revision petitioners are alone entitled to receive the rent. the revision petitioners stated that their .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 16 1998 (HC)

S. Subramaniyan and Co., Represented by Its Partner S. Subramaniam Vs. ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-16-1998

Reported in : (1998)3MLJ526

k. sampath, j.1. the plaintiff in o.s. no. 541 of 1981 before the district munsif, poonamallee is the appellant in the second appeal. it filed the said suit for declaration of title and injunction in respect of the suit property of a total extent of 2 acres, 53 cents in s.nos. 167 and 168 in koyambedu village, saidapet taluk on the following averments. the appellant purchased the property from one chellammal under a registered sale deed dated 25.3.1964. the said land along with the adjacent land belonging to the same owner had been used as a brick field for over 30 years prior to the date of purchase by the appellant. the top soil to a depth ranging from 6 feet to 10 feet had been removed for making bricks and in that process, the old field ridges s.no. 167 from 168 as also the ridges of the internal sub-divisions had become obliterated. the appellant had measured the property and arranged for a plan to be annexed to the sale deed for correct identification. the appellant had constructed some buildings on the land for industrial use and the vacant space had been used as a stockyard for the materials required for the business of the appellant. the whole area was enclosed by a barbed wire fence put up by the appellant firm on the north, south and east and by a fence put by the neighbour on the west. the appellant came to know that in the re-survey map of s.no. 167 a channel had been shown as flowing along with the western and the southern boundaries in an extent of 32 cents and .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //