Chennai Madurai Court February 2016 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.
B. Namachivayabarathi Vs. S. Murugan and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
(Prayer: This contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of the Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondents for the wilful disobedience of the orders of this Honourable Court made in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8687 of 2015 dated 05.08.2015.) 1. This contempt petition has been filed for punishing the respondents for the wilful disobedience of the orders of this Court made in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8687 of 2015 dated 05.08.2015. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, petitioner enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed on 15.10.2015. A copy of the closure report has been furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar. 3. In view of the above submission, this Contempt Petition is dismissed. No costs....
M. Manickam Vs. The Director of Town Panchayat, Chennai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS directing the respondents to return back the amount to the tune of Rs.1,10,000/- (one Lakh ten thousand rupees only) deposit amount paid by the petitioner for shop Nos.32,59,15,3,13,10,1,14 Batlagundu Town Panchayat Bus Stand and daily market within the time stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. When the matter is taken-up for hearing, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the third respondent / Batlagundu Town Panchayat Bus Stand submitted that he would suitably advise the third respondent not only in returning the Earnest Money Deposit, which is sought for in this Writ Petition, but also those participants who were unsuccessful in getting the tender of the third respondent. 2. Recording the said submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs....
R. Sekar Vs. D. Subramanian
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order dated 11.01.2016 made in I.A.No.603 of 2014 in O.S.No.445 of 2014 on the file of the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Trichy.) 1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 11.01.2016, made in I.A.No.603 of 2014 in O.S.No.445 of 2014, on the file of the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Trichy. 2. The revision petitioner is the second defendant. The first respondent is the plaintiff. The first respondent / plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.445 of 2014, on the file of the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Trichy, against the revision petitioner and the second respondent, for injunction. 3. The revision petitioner filed I.A.No.603 of 2014, to reject the plaint, on the ground that the first respondent suppressed the material facts relating to case in O.S.No.310 of 2013, for permanent injunction filed by pet...
N. Vellaichamy Vs. The District Collector, Madurai District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 03.03.2008 on the file of the third respondent and quash the same as illegal with the consequential benefits.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other order or direction in the nature of writ calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 03.03.2008 passed by the third respondent and quash the same. 2. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner has served as sweeper under the direct control of the third respondent. During his service, the third respondent has passed the impugned order dated 03.03.2008 and thereby terminated the petitioner from service. In the impugned order dated 03.03.2008, no specific allegations have been mentioned. Under the said circumstances, the present petitio...
Sevugan and Another Vs. State rep. by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Sak ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records relating to the proceedings in C.C.No.68 of 2015 on the file of the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.68 of 2015 pending on the file of the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, pursuant to the amicable settlement effected between the parties. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.285 of 2014 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) IPC, has been registered against the petitioners/A1 and A2. After completion of the investigation, the 1st respondent has filed a charge sheet, which was duly taken on file in C.C.No.68 of 2015 by the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners/A1 and A2 and the 2nd and 3rd respondents, appeared in persons and their ide...
K. Chinnasamy Vs. Muthukumar
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: This contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of the Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondent herein for wilfully disobeying the orders dated 31.07.2015 made in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14696 of 2015 on the file of this Court.) 1. This contempt petition has been filed for punishing the respondent herein for wilfully disobeying the orders of this Court dated 31.07.2015 made in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14696 of 2015. 2. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 31.07.2015, a case in Crime No.155 of 2016 for offences under Sections 147, 148, 427 and 506(ii) IPC has been registered on 15.02.2016. 3. In view of the above submission, this Court is of the view that nothing survives for further adjudication in this Contempt Petition. Hence, the Contempt Petition is closed. No costs....
G. Ravichandran Vs. The Principal Secretary, Highways and Minor Ports, ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer in W.P(MD)No.8929 of 2015: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the third respondent in his proceedings K.No.4518/2009/Vu.Po2, dated 14.05.2015 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondents herein to take appropriate measures to draw a composite plan to construct road over bridge and service road abutting Ramamurthy Road, Virudhunagar Town, simultaneously to ensure free access of the petitioner to the public places.) Common Order 1. Here, is an yet another round of litigation by the respective petitioners, regarding the issue of construction of a Road Over Bridge in lieu of Existing LC.No.403 at Railway Km. 538/500 - 600 between Virudhunagar and Thulukkapatti Railway Stations (Virudhunagar Town). 2. W.P(MD)No.8929 of 2015 has been filed seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relat...
Pandian Vs. S. Varadharajan and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed U/s. 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code r/w article 215 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to recall the order passed in Crl.O.P.(MD). No.2984 of 2016 dated 18.2.2016 before this High Court. Prayer in CRL OP(MD). 2984/ 2016: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to order 2nd respondent to give police protection for cutting of trees in tanks viz. 1) Periakulam (S.No. 14), 2. Parayankulam (S.No. 30), 3. Ovankulam (S.No. 33), 4. Pudhukulam (S.No. 34) and 5. Molayankulam (S.No. 43) in Pidampatti Village in Pudhukottai District by successful bidders 1. Thiru C. Lakshmanan, S/o. Chindambaram, Vangarampatti, 2. Thiru. K. Selvam S/o. Kulanthaisamy Aavoor, 3. Durairaj, S/o. Poomakonar, Keeranur, 4. S.Subramani, S/o. Shanmugam, Sengalakudi, 5. M. Balachandran, S/o. Muniyandi, Mathur as per order dated 29.01.2016 in M....
C. Kannan Vs. P. Manimekalai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manaparai, Trichy District to consider on the same day the petitioner's surrender and warrant recall application in STC No.70 of 2013 and to recall the non bailable warrant against him.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manaparai, Trichy District to consider on the same day the petitioner's surrender and warrant recall application in S.T.C.No.70 of 2013 and to recall the non bailable warrant against him. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. It is seen that this petitioner was convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manaparai, Trichy District in S.T.C.No.70 of 2013 on 05.02.2016, on which date, the petitioner was not present in the Court. Learned Magistrate passed the order of conviction, but did not sentence the accused, since the Magistrate has to question the accused on sentence. The petitioner has co...
S. Kasirajan Vs. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Madurai and Anot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent police to secure the real culprits in connection with FIR in Crime No.492 of 2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent within the stipulated time.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent police to secure the real culprits in connection with FIR in Crime No.492 of 2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), appearing for the State. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the land in question in Thenoor Village II Bit, is a Natham Promboke and that one Subramani, Karuppayee, Tamilselvan and Chandran have created forged documents as if the property belongs to them and sold it to one Malaisamy by Doc.No.1660 of 2002. In this regard, the petitioner has lodged a complaint, based on which, a case in Crime No.492 of 2015 under Section 420 IPC has been registered by the respondent...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »