Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: chennai Year: 2017 Page 1 of about 22 results (0.035 seconds)

Jan 06 2017 (HC)

Heeralal Constructions Pvt Limited by its Managing Director, Gopichand ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-06-2017

..... the right to make payment of rs.5,00,00,000/- (rupees five hundred lakhs only) in lieu of the area allotted any time. i am unable to see any rationale behind this agreement. there are no shares to be transferred. there is no building to be allotted. in fact, all they had was a paper and pen and they could .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 01 2017 (HC)

M/s. JKM Graphics Solutions Private Limited, Rep. by S. Ravi, Director ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-01-2017

..... of sales tax, the supreme court while considering the provisions for the grant of a set off under rule 41(9) of the bombay sales tax rules, 1959, explained the rationale for a set off as follows: the judgment of the supreme court enunciates that (i) the dealer has no legal right to claim a set off of the purchase tax .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 2017 (HC)

Molly Mathai Vs. P. Basantha Kumar and Others

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-18-2017

..... right that has accrued to it in law as a result of his acting vigilantly" 24. .. .. 25. .. .. 26. .. .. 27. .. .. 28. we are at a loss to fathom any logic or rationale, which could have impelled the high court to condone the delay after holding the same to be unjustifiable. the concepts such as "liberal approach", "justice oriented approach", "substantial justice" can .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 2017 (HC)

T.K. Subramaniam and Another Vs. Rukmani

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-20-2017

..... cases, the case reported in (2011) 4 supreme court cases 363 the hon'ble court has stated as follows: 28. we are at a loss to fathom any logic or rationale, which could have impelled the high court to condone the delay after holding the same to be unjustifiable. the concepts such as liberal approach , justice oriented approach , substantial justice cannot .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 2017 (HC)

M. Kannan Vs. State rep by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police S ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-17-2017

..... be true of men of intelligence, how much more true is it of the ignorant and illiterate or those of feeble intellect. both powell and gideon involved felonies. but their rationale has relevance to any criminal trial, where an accused is deprived of his liberty. the court should consider the probable sentence that will follow if a conviction is obtained. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 2017 (HC)

D. Thangapandi and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Pri ...

Court : Chennai Madurai

Decided on : Feb-02-2017

(prayer: in w.p.(md) no.16217 of 2016 : writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned memorandum of understanding dated 17.04.2015 on the file of the respondent no.2 and quash the same as illegal and consequently for a direction, directing the respondent no.2 to allot 51 fruit shops to the petitioners at the newly constructed wholesale fruit market near mattuthavani, madurai, by following a fair method of allotment within the time period stipulated by this court. prayer in w.p.(md) no.22960 of 2016 : writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in ma.va.3/037969/16 dated 02.11.2016 delivered on 24.11.2016 on the file of the respondent no.2 and quash the same asillegal and consequently for a direction, directing the respondent no.2 to allot 51 fruit shops to the members of the petitioner's society at the newly constructed wholesale fruit market near mattuthavani, madurai, by following a fair method of allotment within the time period stipulated by this court. prayer in w.p.(md) no.16217 of 2016 : writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying to issue a writ of mandamus, to direct the respondent nos.1 and 2 to conduct public auction for the allotment of 240 fruit shops at the newly constructed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 2017 (HC)

The Sivkasi Master Printers Association, Rep. By its President K.A.P.A ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-18-2017

(prayer: petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records on the file of the 3rd respondent in na.ka.no.20366/99/h-1 dated 20.06.2002, enhancing the licence fee payable for running industries and factories, published in virudhunagar district gazette no.7, dated 26.08.2002, in so far as item nos.96[a], 99[a to o], 103[4], [5], [6], [22], [23], [27], [28], [29], [30], [34], [45-a], [45-b], [48], [52], [53], [57], [58] and [59] of the schedule to the licence fees are concerned; same as illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and exorbitant in so far as the members of the petitioner association are concerned.) 1. the petitioner association represents the interest of offset printers of sivakasi. the notification dated 26.08.2002, raising the licence fee payable to the sivakasi municipality is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. heard mr.p.radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and mr.s.pattabiraman, learned counsel for the municipality. 3. the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though under section 249 of the tamil nadu district municipalities act, the sivakasi municipality has the power to levy licence fee on industries and factories operating within its jurisdiction, in the instant case, the municipal council has effected steep increase in the licence fee arbitrarily without sufficient cause. in paragraph no.11 of the affidavit, the petitioner has given the details which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 2017 (HC)

K. Murugan and Others Vs. Dr. V.K. Marimuthu and Others

Court : Chennai Madurai

Decided on : Mar-03-2017

(prayer: second appeal filed under section 100 of the civil procedure code against the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2015, passed in a.s.no.16 of 2014 on the file of the principal district court, theni 2 reversing the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2014 passed in o.s.no.120 of 2011, on the file of the subordinate court, theni.) common judgment 1. the second appeal in s.a.(md)no.358 of 2015 arises against the judgment and decree passed in a.s.no.16 of 2014, on the file of the principal district court, theni, reversing the judgment and decree passed in o.s.no.120 of 2011, on the file of the subordinate court, theni. the first defendant is the appellant and the first respondent is the plaintiff and the respondents 2 to 7 are the defendants 2 to 7 in the suit. the plaintiff filed the suit in o.s.no.120 of 2011 for declaration and permanent injunction. 2. the second appeal in s.a.(md)no.359 of 2015 arises against the judgment and decree passed in a.s.no.17 of 2014, on the file of the principal district court, theni, reversing the judgment and decree passed in o.s.no.148 of 2012, on the file of the subordinate court, theni. the first defendant is the appellant and the first respondent is the plaintiff and the respondents 2 to 10 are the defendants 2 to 10 in the suit. the plaintiff filed the suit in o.s.no.148 of 2012 for declaration in respect of item nos.1 to 4 of the suit property, recovery of possession in respect of item no.1 from the defendants 1 to 4 and in respect of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 03 2017 (HC)

K. Iyeswaran (since deceased) and Others Vs. G. Iyeswarialakshmi and A ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-03-2017

(prayer: original petition no 221 of 2008 was filed under sections 232 and 276 of indian succession act, xxxix of 1925 for the grant of letters of administration. against this petition a caveat was filed on 28.04.2008 by the caveators as per order of this court dated 17.06.2008 in o.p.no.221 of 2008, the original petition no.221 of 2008 was converted into testamentary original suit no.22 of 2008.) 1. the petition originally filed for the grant of letters of administration has been converted as suit in view of the caveat filed by the defendants herein. 2. the brief facts of the plaintiffs' case may be stated as follows: (i) the plaintiffs 1 and 2 are the sons of mrs.k.saroja, wife of late r.kothandaraman pillai, died on 11.07.2007, who is the testatrix. the said k.saroja left a will dated 14.07.2006 bequeathing the suit property in favour of plaintiffs 1 and 2. the plaintiffs 1 and 2 are the only beneficiaries under the said will. the deceased k.saroja had not mentioned any executor of the will in the will executed by her. the deceased k.saroja has left behind her plaintiffs 1 and 2 and defendants 1 and 2 to succeed to her estate. (ii) since the 1 st plaintiff, viz., k.iyeswaran, expired on 07.09.2013, plaintiffs 3 to 5 were brought on record as his legal heirs. (iii) the amount of assets which is likely to come into the plaintiffs' hands does not exceed in the aggregate sum of rs.7,00,000/- and the net amount of the said assets is rs.6,98,500/-. there is no next of kin or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 02 2017 (HC)

Dr. Balamugunthan working as a Junior Speciallist in Orthopaedic in Go ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-02-2017

(prayer: this appeal is filed under section 96 of c.p.c. against the judgement and decree dated 31.10.2007 passed in o.s.no.66 of 2004 on the file of the additional district judge, puducherry at karaikal.) 1. the second defendant in o.s.no.66 of 2004 on the file of the additional district judge, puducherry at karaikal is the appellant. 2. the above suit was filed by the first respondent claiming compensation of rs.10,00,000/- for the injuries and permanent disability suffered by her as a result of negligence and wrong treatment given in the government hospital at karaikal. 3. the appellant/second defendant was working as a specialist in orthopedic division at government hospital, karaikal at the relevant point of time. according to the plaintiff on 26.1.1999 around 11.30 a.m. while she was returning from school after attending the republic day celebration at kamarajar square, karaikal, a cyclist who was coming in the opposite direction dashed against her. it is claimed that as a result of the said accident she was injured in the right leg below the knee resulting in severe pain as well as bleeding. immediately, she was taken to the government general hospital karaikal and first aid was given by the 2nd defendant in the suit namely, dr.balamungunthan, government hospital, karaikal and she was referred to orthopedic ward. an x-ray was taken of her right leg. the signature of the mother of the plaintiff was taken informing that there will be a surgery. however, the 2nd defendant .....

Tag this Judgment!


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