Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: chennai Year: 2005 Page 5 of about 60 results (0.030 seconds)

Apr 26 2005 (HC)

Ramaraju, S/O. N.A. Subbaraja Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-26-2005

Reported in : 2005(2)CTC741

order1. these two public interest litigations have been filed on behalf of some of the residents of rajapalayam in virudhunagar district and kodaikanal in dindigul district respectively. the questions raised in both the writ petitions being similar, such petitions were heard together and shall be disposed by the common order.2. w.p. no. 1964 of 2005 has been filed by a resident of rajapalayam, who is running a social welfare organisation, seeking prevention of eviction of poor people who are in occupation of government poramboke lands in rajapalayam municipal area. it has been stated in the affidavit that malayadipatti village in rajapalayam municipality has a total population of about 20,000 and even today, the authorities of the temple are demanding lease amount from the people stating that the lands are temple lands and on the other hand the fourth respondent municipality continues to assess and collect property tax from the people. it is further stated that the other areas like avarampatti, suraikaipatti, ooranipatti, amman pottal street, sammandhapuram, madasamy koil street public are also similarly placed and most of them do not have lands of their own and in all these areas there are nearly about 30,000 families who have put up houses in poramboke lands and the fourth respondent municipality had also assessed and is collecting house tax from them.2.1. it is stated by the petitioner that in view of the orders passed by this courts in w.p.no. 689 of 2005 on 2.2.2005 and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 2005 (HC)

Madras Dock Labour Board Vs. K. Geetha and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-29-2005

Reported in : II(2006)ACC452; [2006(108)FLR1023]

m. karpagavinayagam, j.1. c. kannaiyan, r.p. mazdoor, a workman employed by the madras dock labour board, went for duty to the port on 3rd february, 1994 for the 2nd shift between 2 p.m. and 10 p.m. while performing his duty, he fell into the sea and drowned. the dead body was taken out of the sea water on 6th february, 1994. the officials of the dock labour board informed the family members of the said kannaiyan about the same. the widow, daughter and son of the deceased filed an application, before the commissioner for workmen's compensation, claiming compensation of rs. 1,15,916. the commissioner, after inquiry, passed an order awarding rs. 75,324 as compensation. aggrieved by this order, the madras dock labour board has filed this appeal.2. the substantial questions of law on the basis of which this appeal has been filed, are as follows:(1) whether the deceased kannaiyan died in an accident which arose out of and in the course of his employment under the appellant/ board?(2) whether the commissioner for workmen's compensation was justified in invoking the principles of notional extension when the facts in this case do not justify such approach? 3. elaborating the above questions of law, mr. g. veknkataraman, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would make the following contentions:the deceased was allotted to work for the vessel vishwa kamudhi which was berthed at s.q. 3 during the 2nd shift on 3rd february, 1994 between 2 p.m. and 10 p.m. the dead body of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 2005 (TRI)

Kay Arr Enterprises Vs. Joint Cit, Special Range Ii

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Decided on : Jul-26-2005

Reported in : (2005)97ITD291(Chennai)

these appeals are filed by different assessees. since common issue is involved in these appeals and the assessees are of the same group, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. in these three appeals of the assessees, the relevant assessment year involved is 1996-97 pertaining to the financial year 1995-96.the only common issue in these appeals is that as to whether, in view of family arrangement as arrived at by the assessees to rearrange their shareholdings to avoid possible litigation among themselves will attract capital gain or not and whether it is a transfer or not.the briefly stated facts are that the assessees, along with their family members in the previous year ended 31-3-1996, had transferred shares owned by the assessees and family members in m/s. lakshmi mills ltd. and lakshmi card clothing co. ltd. to the family members of shri g.k. sundaram. the assessees in regard to these transfers had submitted as under: "the assessee has transferred icc and imc shares and converted into vijayeswari textiles ltd. share. in this connection we beg to submit the following: shri k. rajagopal and his family members are part of the lakhsmi group of families, certain companies were managed and controlled by the families of sri g.k. sundaram and sri k. rajagopal, jointly subsequent to certain family arrangement in which certain companies were allotted for the control and management of sri g.k. devarajulu. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 2005 (TRI)

Kay Arr Enterprises Vs. the Jt. Commissioner of I.T.,

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Decided on : Jul-26-2005

Reported in : (2005)279ITR163(Chennai)

1. these appeals are filed by different assessees. since common issue is involved in these appeals and the assessees are of the same group, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. in these three appeals of the assessees, the relevant assessment year involved is 1996-96 pertaining to the financial year 1995-96.2. the only common issue in these appeals is that as to whether, in view of family arrangement as arrived at by the assessees to rearrange their share holdings to avoid possible litigation among themselves will attract capital gain or not and whether it is a transfer or not.3. the briefly stated facts are that the assessees, along with their family members in the previous year ended 31.3.1996 had transferred shares owned by the assessees and family members in m/s. lakshmi mills ltd. and lakshmi card clothing co. ltd. to the family members of shri g.k. sundaram. the assessees in regard to these transfers had submitted as under: "the assessee has transferred icc and imc shares and converted into vijayeswari textiles ltd. share. in this connection we beg to submit the following: shri k. rajagopal and his family members are part of the lakshmi group of families, certain companies were managed and controlled by the families of sri g.k. sundaram and sri k. rajagopal, jointly subsequent to certain family arrangement in which certain companies were allotted for the control and management of sri g.k. devarajulu. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 2005 (HC)

His Holiness Sri Kanchi Kamakoti Peetadhipathi Jagadguru Sri Sankarach ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-11-2005

Reported in : 2005(1)CTC657

orderk.p. sivasubramaniam, j.1. by consent of both parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing.2. this writ petition has been filed by the senior pontiff of sri sankaracharya swamigal srimatam samasthanam, represented by its manager. the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus to forbear respondents-1 to 3 from interfering with the right of the petitioner to manage and administer its affairs, property, including the bank accounts, in various banks held in its name and in the names of the various endowments connected with it.3. in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, after referring to the advent of sree adi sankara and his preachings, it is stated that adi sankara was intimately associated with kanchi and he established the mutt for his residence during his last years and also nominated a young boy as his successor. sree sankara mutt, established by sree adi sankara at kancheepuram, is an organisation built around advaita philosophy for its propagation and that the mutt has a definite name and is a religious denomination within the meaning of article 26 of the constitution. the petitioner is, therefore, entitled to administer and manage its affairs and property without interference from the state.4. on 11.11.2004, the senior pontiff was arrested at mahaboob nagar, andhra pradesh, on alleged charges under section 302 read with sections 120-b and 34, i.p.c. on the allegation that he conspired with others to do away with one sankararaman of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 2005 (HC)

Bharathidasan University, Represented by Its Registrar-in-charge and o ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-23-2005

Reported in : AIR2005Mad377; 2005(2)CTC182

orderp. sathasivam, j.1. higher education department of state of tamil nadu, bharathidasan university, tiruchirapalli, aggrieved by the common order of the learned single judge dated 25.11.2004, made in w. p. no. 27030/2004, etc., batch, directing the universities to consider the applications submitted by the petitioner-institution for grant of affiliation for conducting teacher training course for the academic year 2004-2005 without insisting on the production of the no objection certificate from the state government, have filed the above writ appeals. since the issues raised in all the writ appeals are one and the same, they are being disposed of by the following order.2. for convenience, we shall refer the facts leading to the filing of writ appeal no. 4204/2004, filed by bharathidasan university, tiruchirapalli. dhanalakshmi srinivasan educational and charitable trust, perambalur, aggrieved by the proceedings of the bharathidasan university, tiruchirapalli dated 23.9.2004 declining to consider and grant affiliation to their college to establish a b. ed., training course, has filed w. p. no. 27757/2004 for quashing the same and for consequential direction to the university to consider their application for affiliation for b. ed, course for their college in the name and style of dhanalakshmi srinivasan college of education, perambalur for the academic year 2004-2005. according to them, their trust desired to establish a teacher training college at perambalur. the course in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 2005 (HC)

Pappayammal Vs. Palanisamy, Sellammal (Died) and Rukmani

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-29-2005

Reported in : AIR2005Mad431; 2005(3)CTC292; (2005)3MLJ32

m. karpagavinayagam, j. 1. pappayammal, appellant herein, filed a suit for partition and separate possession against the defendants 1 and 2 and the said suit was dismissed. aggrieved by the said dismissal, she filed an appeal before the lower appellate court, which, in turn, confirmed the same and dismissed the appeal. hence, this second appeal, as against the concurrent judgments.2. the case of the plaintiff is as follows :one kuppanna gounder purchased two items of the suit property under ex.b-1, dated 14.12.1932, and ex.b-2, dated 19.07.1934 respectively. the said kuppanna gounder had two wives, namely, muthammal and sellammal. he got a son through his first wife, muthammal, by name duraisamy gounder. after the death of muthammal, kuppanna gounder married sellammal, the second defendant, through whom, the first defendant palanisamy was born. the said kuppanna gounder died on 30.07.1939, leaving behind his son duraisamy gounder, born through his first wife muthammal, and the second wife sellammal, the second defendant, and her son palanisamy, the first defendant. the plaintiff pappayammal is the wife of the said duraisamy gounder. in the year 1956, there was a partition through the deed ex.b-22, in which some properties were allotted to duraisamy gounder. thereafter, he settled the same in favour of his wife pappayammal, the plaintiff, on 04.09.1962, through the settlement deed ex.b-26. however, the suit properties were not partitioned then. later, duraisamy gounder died. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 2005 (HC)

R. Ramachandra Raja Vs. M. Nanda Govind

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-16-2005

Reported in : (2005)3MLJ132

ordert.v. masilamani, j. 1. the revision petitioner as landlord has filed this revision challenging the legality of the order passed by the rent control appellate authority (vii judge, court of small causes), chennai in r.c.a. no. 723 of 1994 dated 26.3.1999.2. the revision petitioner filed the petition in r.c.o.p.no. 2415 of 1989 before the rent controller (xvi judge, court of small causes), chennai for eviction of the respondent herein/tenant under section 10(2)(i) and 10(2)(iii) of the tamil nadu buildings (lease and rent control) act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'tamil nadu act 18 of 1960') on the basis that the respondent committed wilful default in the payment of rent and also without the petitioner's knowledge and consent committed waste in the demised premises by removing old super-structure and putting up a new construction. the learned rent controller, having analysed the evidence both oral and documentary adduced on either side and upon hearing the counsel for both sides, allowed the petition and directed the respondent to vacate the premises within two months from the date of the order.3. aggrieved by the order passed by the rent controller, the respondent herein filed the appeal in r.c.a.no. 723 of 1993 before the rent control appellate authority, who after having scrutinised the recorded evidence and after hearing the arguments advanced on either side, allowed the appeal by setting aside the fair and decretal orders passed by the rent controller and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 2005 (HC)

Subaida and Habeeba Vs. K.A.M.P. Meerania Muslim Educational Society b ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-18-2005

Reported in : AIR2006Mad112; 2005(3)CTC603

m. karpagavinayagam, j.1. maria misria, the appellant in s.a. no. 1092 of 2004 as secretary representing k.a.m.p.meerania educational society, kalakad, filed a suit for declaration as against subaida and habeeba, the appellants in s.a. no. 439 of 2004 that the plaintiff representing the society alone is entitled to act as secretary in o.s. no. 701 of 1996.2. the suit ultimately was dismissed. however, in the appeal filed by the plaintiff in a.s. no. 94 of 1999, the lower appellate court modified the decree and gave the lesser relief in favour of the plaintiff. aggrieved over this, the defendants 1 and 2 have filed s.a. no. 439 of 2004 before this court. as the plaintiff was not satisfied with lesser relief, she filed s.a. no. 1092 of 2004 seeking for entire relief. both these appeals are heard together and common judgment is being rendered.3. for the convenient sake, subaida and habeeba, the appellants in s.a. no. 439 of 2004 are referred to as the defendants and maria misria, the appellant in s.a. no. 1092 of 2004 as the plaintiff.4. the case of the plaintiff is as follows:'(a) k.a.m.p.meerania muslim kalvi sangam was floated in the year 1947. the sangam was started as a society after registration by k.a. meera sahib and his brother k.a. peer mohamed. they were the president and the secretary respectively. the society maintained the schools. the secretary was in charge of the schools. the posts of president and secretary are hereditary and the respective heirs alone can .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 2005 (HC)

Modern Radio Service, Rep. by Its Partner, G. Venkatesan Chettiar Vs. ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-29-2005

Reported in : 2005(3)CTC722; [2005(106)FLR1129]

orderr. balasubramanian, j.1. as early as 30.4.1997, a learned judge of this court ordered notice of motion. it continues to be in the same state of affairs. admit.2. the respondent herein passed an order dated 7.7.1989 under section 45-a of the employees' state insurance act, hereinafter referred to as 'the act' determining the contribution payable by the appellant for the period from july 1981 to may 1988 at rs.34,473 with interest. the appellant went before the employees' state insurance court, hereinafter referred to as the 'insurance court', chennai, in e.i.o.p. no. 63/1989 to quash the order and for a declaration that the appellant's establishment and the three independent companies namely, modern radio service - fridge, modern radio service -fan and vijayalakshmi and company are not one establishment and therefore should not be covered as such under the e.s.i. act. the e.s.i. court by order dated 31.7.1996 in e.i.o.p. no. 63/1989 directed the registry to return to the appellant the proceedings for presentation before the proper court. it is this order which is in challenge in this appeal filed before this court.3. learned counsel for the appellant would submit that in view of rule 16 of the tamil nadu employee's insurance court rules, 1951, hereinafter referred to as 'the rules', the impugned order cannot be sustained. according to him, under the rules referred to above, the court at chennai would have jurisdiction, since admittedly a part of the cause of action has .....

Tag this Judgment!


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