Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.71 seconds)
Documents citing Tmt.G.Saroja vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 2 December, 2010

M.Gangachalam vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2017

In the case of Saroja Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Electricity Department and another, reported in 2014 (3) CTC 553. This is also a case of death due to electrocution where the Electricity Board was found to be negligence in maintaining power cables. The learned Judge of this Court has also adverted to various decisions of this Court, in granting compensation in similar situations and finally held that the petitioner therein was entitled to a sum of Rs.6,04,600/- only towards compensation for the death of petitioner's minor son. In fact, learned Judge also directed to pay the amount with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of writ petition till the date of deposit.
Madras High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 2 - V Parthiban - Full Document

V. Annapoornam vs The Chairman

In the case of Saroja Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Electricity Department and another, reported in 2014 (3) CTC 553. This is also a case of death due to electrocution where the Electricity Board was found to be negligence in maintaining power cables. The learned Judge of this Court has also adverted to various decisions of this Court, in granting compensation in similar situations and finally held that the petitioner therein was entitled to a sum of Rs.6,04,600/- only towards compensation for the death of petitioner's minor son. In fact, learned Judge also directed to pay the amount with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of writ petition till the date of deposit.
Madras High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - V Parthiban - Full Document

V. Annapoornam vs The Chairman

In the case of Saroja Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Electricity Department and another, reported in 2014 (3) CTC 553. This is also a case of death due to electrocution where the Electricity Board was found to be negligence in maintaining power cables. The learned Judge of this Court has also adverted to various decisions of this Court, in granting compensation in similar situations and finally held that the petitioner therein was entitled to a sum of Rs.6,04,600/- only towards compensation for the death of petitioner's minor son. In fact, learned Judge also directed to pay the amount with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of writ petition till the date of deposit.
Madras High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - V Parthiban - Full Document

Mr.S.Jayaraman vs Tamil Nadu Generation And Distribution ... on 1 February, 2018

In the case of Saroja Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Electricity Department and another, reported in 2014 (3) CTC 553. This is also a case of death due to electrocution where the Electricity Board was found to be negligence in maintaining power cables. The learned Judge of this Court has also adverted to various decisions of this Court, in granting compensation in similar situations and finally held that the petitioner therein was entitled to a sum of Rs.6,04,600/- only towards compensation for the death of petitioner's minor son. In fact, learned Judge also directed to pay the amount with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of writ petition till the date of deposit.
Madras High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - V Parthiban - Full Document

S.Deivendran vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 17 March, 2017

In the case of Arulmeri .vs. The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Ramanathapuram and another reported (2013) 2 ML 302, wherein, this Court has categorically held that there was no dispute to the cause of death which occurred due to the negligence of the Board and no need to go for the Civil Court to establish the death which occurred due to electrocution and the court held that the Petitioner was entitled to compensation.. In similar circumstances, this Court in another decision in the case of Saroja .vs. Government of Tamil Nadu reported in 2014(3) CTC 553, wherein, it has been held that Writ Petition in such circumstances clearly maintainable and award of compensation on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case.
Madras High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - V Parthiban - Full Document

S.Deivendaran vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 17 March, 2017

In the case of Arulmeri .vs. The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Ramanathapuram and another reported (2013) 2 ML 302, wherein, this Court has categorically held that there was no dispute to the cause of death which occurred due to the negligence of the Board and no need to go for the Civil Court to establish the death which occurred due to electrocution and the court held that the Petitioner was entitled to compensation.. In similar circumstances, this Court in another decision in the case of Saroja .vs. Government of Tamil Nadu reported in 2014(3) CTC 553, wherein, it has been held that Writ Petition in such circumstances clearly maintainable and award of compensation on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case.
Madras High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - V Parthiban - Full Document
1