Chennai Madurai Court October 2015 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
D. Rukmani Ammal and Another Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu represented b ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Writ Appeal (MD).No.489 of 2015 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 29.04.2015 passed by single Judge in W.P.(MD)No.21284 of 2014. Writ Appeal (MD).No.490 of 2015 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 29.04.2015 passed by single Judge in W.P.(MD)No.21285 of 2014.) 1. Before the Writ Court (learned single Judge), in W.P.(MD).Nos.21284 and 21285 of 2014, the appellants herein (writ petitioners) challenged the validity of the order dated 24.07.2013, passed by the second respondent-District Collector, Tuticorin, in and by which, the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board (for short, 'TNSCB') was granted permission for constructing houses and buildings for the poor people, i.e. landless poor labourers who were dispossessed from their hutment at the time of widening the roads. The learned single Judge, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, dismissed both the Writ Petitions by common order dated 29.04.2015, against w...
K. Bharathi Vs. The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Commercial C ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records in connection with the C.C.No.319 of 2003 onthe file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ramanathapuram and quash the same.) 1. On 14.10.2015, when the matter was called, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, hence the matter was ordered to be posted today i.e., on 28.10.2015 under the caption 'for dismissal'. 2. Even today when the matter is called there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed....
Iffco Tokyo General Insurance Company Ltd., rep.by its Branch Manager ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, to set aside the fair and decreetal order, dated 23.08.2013, made in M.C.O.P.No.803 of 2013, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Sub Judge), Tiruchirappalli and allow this civil miscellaneous appeal.) This is an insurer's appeal on the question of quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal. 2. First respondent, who sustained injuries in a road accident on 23.12.2009, claimed compensation in M.C.O.P.No.803 of 2013, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Sub Court), Tiruchirappalli, for personal injuries. 3. Considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal fixed negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle, which has been insured with the appellant Insurance Company. 4. Considering the medical evidence of the Doctor, the Tribunal adopted the multiplier method for 70% disability sustained by the claimant, took the income at Rs.3,000/- per month and determined th...
K. Thirunavukkarasu and Others Vs. The Deputy Superintendent of Police ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the 1st respondent police to complete the investigation and file a final report in Crime No.65 of 2015 pending on the file of the 1st respondent within a time frame as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking a direction to the firstt respondent police to complete the investigation and file a final report in Crime No.65 of 2015 pending on the file of the first respondent within a time frame as fixed by this Hon'ble Court. 2. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner, a case has been registered in Crime No.65 of 2015 on 20.04.2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 447, 506(ii) IPC r/w Section 3(1)(r) and (s) 3(2) (va) SC/ST POA Amendment...
N. Marimuthu Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent to register the complaint of the petitioner dated 14.3.2015 and investigate the same in accordance with the law and also file the final report.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, to the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent to register the complaint of the petitioner dated 14.03.2015 and investigate the same in accordance with the law and also file the final report. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has given complaint to the second respondent on 14.03.2015, but the second respondent police had not taken any steps to register a case and hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief. 3. Today the Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District, is present before this and submits that on the basis of the complaint given by th...
S. Petchiraja Vs. The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nad ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the Respondent No.5 to not to harass the petitioner and his family members by considering the representation dated 21.08.2015 in accordance with law.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the fifth respondent is harassing the petitioner under 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 t...
Saradha and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Inspector of Po ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(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....
Sundar @ Sundaravel and Another Vs. State rep. by The Inspector of Pol ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the III Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR Act), Madurai to consider the bail application to be filed by the petitioner on the same day of his surrender 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 enac...
Tvl.R.S. Enterprises, Rep. by its Partner Thiru.S.Dinakaran, Tuticorin ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the third respondent issued in TIN:33375862859/2011-12, dated 25.05.2015, and quash the same and to direct the third respondent to consider the objections filed by the petitioner on 17.06.2015 and further objections on 29.09.2015 accord a personal hearing after issuing notice and then to pass such fresh order if any for the assessment year 2011-2012.) 1. The writ petition has been filed praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the impugned proceedings of the third respondent in TIN:33375862859/2011-12, dated 25.09.2015, and quash the same and further to direct the third respondent to consider the objections filed by the petitioner on 17.06.2015 and further objections on 29.09.2015 and accord a personal hearing, after issuing notice and then to pass such fresh order, if any, for the ...
A. Yesappan Vs. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) L ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-28-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to settle retirement benefits of the petitioner including gratuity, the commuted value of pension, leave salary and all other attendant benefits with interest at the rate of 18% per annum within the time that may be stipulated by this Court and further directing the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum for the belated payment of the provident fund and social security scheme arrears within the time limit that may be fixed by this Court.) Common Order: 1. The prayer in these Writ Petitions are for issuance of a Mandamus to direct the respondents to pay retirement benefits with interest to the petitioners in view of their respective representations. 2. Mr.A.P.Muthupandian, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents. 3. It is stated that though the petitioners was allowed to retire from the service of the respond...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »