.....said application was dismissed by the trial court by order dated 07.08.2015. hence, he filed the present civil revision petition. 6. considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the view that the order dated 07.08.2015 made in ia.no.9086/2015 in ia.no.16575/2013 in os.no.4012/1999 refusing to reissue the warrant to the advocate commissioner to reinspect the suit schedule property afresh and file his report in accordance with law, is not correct particularly when the order setting the revision petitioner as exparte, was set aside in the final decree proceedings. 7. hence, i am inclined to interfere with the order questioned before this court. accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. a further direction is issued to reissue the warrant to the advocate commissioner to reinspect the suit schedule property afresh and file his report in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from today. it is needless to say that the advocate commissioner shall issue notice to all the parties, before making inspection. 8. the civil revision petition is disposed of in the above terms. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....dated 9.7.2007. 2. circular memorandum no.187352/cr.iv(1)/2009 dated 30.9.2010. in reference first cited, the hon'ble supreme court has, inter alia, ordered that section 158(6) of the motor vehicles act, 1988 mandates the police officer to forward a copy of the police report to the claims tribunal having jurisdiction and to the concerned insurance company (as discussed below). 2. section 158(6) of the motor vehicles act, 1988 provides follows: as soon as any information regarding any accident involving death or bodily injury to any person is recorded or report under this section is completed by a police officer, the officer-in-charge of the police station shall forward a copy of the same within thirty days from the date of recording of information or, as the case may be, on completion of such report to the claims tribunal having jurisdiction and a copy thereof to the concerned insurer, and where a copy is made available to the owner, he shall also within thirty days of receipt of such report, forward the same to such claims tribunal and insurer. ? 3. rule 150 of the central motor vehicles rules, 1989 prescribes as follows: 150. furnishing copies of reports to claims tribunal.- 1......
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....the guise of enquiry and hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief. 3. the learned government advocate (criminal side), on instructions, would submit that the petitioner is an accused in crime no.2 of 2015 for the offences under sections 147, 148, 109, 120(b), 302 r/w 149 ipc and 25(1-b) (a) of arms act and 3(2)(v) of sc/st (poa) act, 1989 r/w 149 ipc. 4. considering the rival submissions made on both sides, the fifth respondent is directed not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry, but let the police investigate into the matter in accordance with law and the mandates as found set out in d.k.basu vs. state of west bengal reported in air (1997) sc 610. if really, the police want to interrogate, it is open for the police to issue summons to the petitioner. thereupon, the petitioner shall appear before the police and submit himself for interrogation. 5. the criminal original petitions are disposed of with the above direction.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....written statements contradicts the said identity of the property and to strengthen his case he would also furnish his property schedule. 8. in the facts and circumstances, dispute as to the physical features and identity of the property is involved. that cannot be established before the court by any amount of oral evidence. in such circumstances, report of advocate/commissioner as to the said aspect will assist the court in taking a correct decision. it will also be beneficial to both sides. in this view of the matter, the view taken by the trial court in i.a.no.838 of 2014 is perverse and it warrants our interference. 9. in the circumstances ordered as under: (i) the order of dismissal passed by the district munsif, kulithalai in i.a.no.838 of 2014 in o.s.no.105 of 2014 is set aside. (ii) the trial court will appoint an advocate/commissioner to inspect the suit property, note down the physical features of the property mentioned in the plaint schedule and in the written statement schedule with the help of a qualified surveyor and will file his report. (iii) the trial court will give two weeks time to both sides to file their objection, if any to the report of the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....the file of the learned rent controller, xv judge, court of small causes, chennai, for eviction. he filed rca.no.434 of 2015 against the aforesaid judgment and decree made in rcop.no.121 of 2014. 2. the grievance of the revision petitioner is that pending appeal, stay was not granted. in the docket order made in mp.no.271 of 2015 in rca.434 of 2015, only notice was ordered. hence, the revision petitioner apprehends that the respondent would proceed with the execution proceedings. 3. in view of the same, this court directs the learned rent controller, not to proceed with the execution petition if any, till mp.no.271 of 2015 in rca no.434/2015 is disposed of. the appellate court, viii judge, small causes court, chennai is directed to dispose of mp.271/2015 in rca.no.434/2015 on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 4.the civil revision petition is disposed of with the above directions. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT(prayer: criminal original petition is filed under section 482 of cr.p.c. praying to call for the records in crime no.141 of 2009 dated 26.3.2009 pending on the file of the kanyakumari police station, kanyakumari district and quash the same.) 1. the petitioners have come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, to call for the records in crime no.141 of 2009 dated 26.3.2009 pending on the file of the kanyakumari police station, kanyakumari district and quash the same. 2. the report which shows that final report has been filed on 11.01.2010 and the same was taken on file in c.c.no.14 of 2014 and the case was posted to 17.11.2015. 3. recording the same, this criminal original petition ia dismissed. consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....in cr.no.311 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police.) 1. heard both sides. 2. the petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the offences punishable under sections 323, 324 and 506(ii) ipc r/w section 3(1)(x) sc/st in crime no.311 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, move this petition seeking a direction to the learned iii additional district and sessions judge (pcr act), madurai, to accept the surrender of the petitioner and consider his bail application on the same day on merits, in relating to crime no.311 of 2015. 3. perused the records. 4. the learned government advocate (crl. side) submits that the injured has been discharged from the hospital. 5. the offences complained of, other than the offence under the special enactment, may not be serious in nature warranting initial detention in jail, even before considering the bail application. 6. therefore, the learned iii additional district and sessions judge (pcr act), madurai,is directed to accept the surrender of the petitioner and consider his bail application on the very same day purely on the basis of merits and in accordance with law. accordingly, this criminal original petition is ordered.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....that the order relied by the petitioner was disposed of, by this court, with certain directions to the respondents therein. he further submitted thatthe same yardstick may be applied for the present writ petitiontoo. 4. following the order made in w.p.(md)nos.19460 to 19464 of 2015 dated 28.10.2015 and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court passes the following order:- the petitioner firm is directed to remit 10% of the disputed tax in question in the writ petition to the third respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. on such payment, the orders impugned in the writ petition stands set aside and the respondents are directed to provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks, thereafter. 5. with the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. no costs, consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....of each month. ? 5. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners' case may be considered in the light of the above said decision, since the issue involved in the writ petitions has already been answered in the above said decision by the hon'ble division bench of this court. 6. considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the issue involved in the writ petitions has already been answered by the hon'ble division bench of this court, the writ petitions are disposed of in the light of the above said decision. accordingly, the retirement benefits of the petitioners are directed to be settled by way of 12 equal instalments and the first instalments to be paid from december 2015 and each of the instalments should be paid on or before 7th of each month. it is needless to mention that the entire arrears shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 7. with the above direction, these writ petitions are disposed of. no costs.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT(prayer: criminal original petition is filed under section 482 of cr.p.c. praying to direct the third respondent to complete the investigation by way of register a case on the basis of the order issued by this court dated 13.04.2013 in crl.o.p. (md) no. 3754 of 2013.) 1. the petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, to the third respondent to complete the investigation by way of register a case on the basis of the order issued by this court dated 13.04.2013 in crl.o.p. (md)no.3754 of 2013. 2. when the matter is taken up for hearing the learned government advocate (crl. side), appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submits that as per the order of this court dated 13.04.2013 an enquiry has been conducted and the same has been closed on 09.09.2014. 3. recording the submission of the learned government advocate (crl. side), this criminal original petition is closed.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT