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.
Mary Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-23-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents to register a criminal case against the accused based on the complaint dated 03.02.2016 preferred by the petitioner and to take action against the accused in accordance with law and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and thus render justice.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents to register a criminal case against the accused based on the complaint dated 03.02.2016 preferred by the petitioner and to take action against the accused in accordance with law. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that the complaint dated 03.02.2016 has been sent by post to the respondents. 3. In view of the above submission, the petitioner is directed to appear in person before the 2nd respondent along with this order and l...
Angappan Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-23-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents to register the case based on the complaint given by the petitioner dated 17.10.2015.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents to register the case based on the complaint given by the petitioner dated 17.10.2015. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. On reading of the complaint dated 17.10.2015, it is seen that there is a dispute pending between the petitioner and the opposite party, in connection with a Government Poramboke Land. It is alleged by the petitioner that the opposite party is trying to fence the land and when it was questioned, the opposite party has abused him by calling his caste name. The averments in the complaint do not inspire confidence of this Court for issuing a direction to the respondent police to register an FIR. Hence, no positive direction can be issued to the r...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-23-2016
1. It may be necessary to state the bare facts that are required for deciding about the maintainability of this petition. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the 5th respondent has registered a case in Crime Nos.34 and 37 of 2014, but did not conduct proper investigation and has perfunctorily closed the cases as mistake of fact. In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner prays for a direction to the State and Central Governments to take action against the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District and the Inspector of Police, Anti Land Grabbing Cell for not properly conducting the investigation of the said two cases. Registry of this Court entertained certain doubts about the maintainability of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and hence, the matter was posted before this Court for deciding the said issue. 3. Heard the Party-in-Person, who reiterated his stand by contending that such direction is permissible under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Section 482 Cr.P.C. re...
R. Selvakumar Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-22-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order made in W.P(MD)No.17102 of 2015 dated 22.09.2015.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this writ appeal, is to an order, made in W.P(MD)No.17102 of 2015, dated 22.09.2015, by which, a learned single Judge of this Court, has sustained the order, in Na.Ka.No.321/E/14, dated 03.09.2015, passed by the 4th respondent/Principal, Government Arts College, Melur, Madurai District. 2. Brief facts, as deduced from the material on record, and the impugned order, are that the appellant was appointed as a Programmer, in the cadre of Lab Assistant, on 15.07.1996, by the 4th respondent. Pursuant to the 6th Pay Commission report, the post of Programmer, in the cadre of Lab Assistant, was re-designated as Assistant Programmer and the pay scale was fixed as Rs. 9300-34800+4200, vide order, dated 27.10.2010. Grade pay was later on, revised as Rs.4,400/- from Rs.4,200/-. In 1996, the appellant was given the selection grade, in the post...
Hindu Nadar Educational Trust and Others Vs. Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai a ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-22-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order made in W.M.P(MD)Nos.23 and 24 of 2016 in W.P(MD)No.23 of 2016 dated 05.01.2016.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this writ appeal, is to an order, made in W.M.P(MD)Nos.23 and 24 of 2016 in W.P(MD)No.23 of 2016, dated 05.01.2016. 2. W.P(MD)No.23 of 2016. has been filed. for the following relief:- ''To issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 04.12.2015 in Na.Ka.No.3526/AA5/2015 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequentially approve the representatives nominated by the petitioner society through its representation dated 29.06.2015 as members of the school committee of Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai Periayaki Rengasamy Girls Higher Secondary School, Nilakottai.'' 3. W.M.P(MD)Nos.23 and 24 of 2016, have been filed, for the following relief:- ''Prayer in W.M.P(MD)No.23 of 2016 : To pass an order of injunction restraining the respondents 1...
Balu Vs. State, rep. by The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-22-2016
(Prayer: Criminal appeal is filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the Judgment dated 14.09.2012 passed in Sessions Case No.154 of 2009 by the Second Additional District and Sessions Court, Tiruchirappalli.) A.Selvam, J 1. The conviction and sentence dated 14.09.2012 passed in Sessions Case No.154 of 2009 by the Second Additional District and Sessions Court, Tiruchirappalli are being challenged in the present Criminal Appeal. 2. The epitome of the case of the prosecution is that due to money transaction the accused has had animosity with the deceased by name Abdul Majith. On 12.12.2008 at about 06.00 p.m. under the guise of getting employment to the deceased, the accused has taken him from his house and subsequently the accused has murdered him in a graveyard. After occurrence, one Gobalakrishnan, Village Administrative Officer has given a complaint and the same has been registered in Crime No.805 of 2008. 3. On receipt of the complaint, the Investigat...
Dr. S. Senthil Andavan Vs. The Secretary to Government of India
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-22-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the 3rd respondent not to interfere in the petitioner's medical practice on the light of Apex Court Judgment based on his representation dated 13.01.2015.) 1. The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus forbearing the 3rd respondent not to interfere in his medical practice on the light of Apex Court Judgment based on his representation, dated 13.01.2015. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is possessing basic qualification in Homeopathy, Unani or Siddha and also he is also possessing Diplama Degree in Community Medical Service and Essential Drugs. The Government of Tamil Nadu issued a Gazettee on 26.02.2014, wherein 129 persons have been approved and enrolled in the Register of Priessnitz Institute of Naturopathy as Registered Naturopathy Medical Practice. In the said gazette, the petitioner's name was also mentioned...
M. Dhanaraj Vs. The Superintending Engineer, Trichy Electricity Distri ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-22-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent pertaining to its order bearing Memo No.EE/OandM/U/Try/Adm/A1/F Suspension/D.39/2011dated 29.01.2011 and to quash the same and consequently direct respondent to reinstate the petitioner in the service by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 11.02.2016.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for issuance of Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent pertaining to its order bearing Memo No.EE/O and M/U/Try/Adm/A1/F Suspension/D.39/2011 dated 29.01.2011 and to quash the same and consequently direct respondent to reinstate the petitioner in the service by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 11.02.2016. 2. Mr.A.U.Ramanathan, learned Standing Counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 3. By consent, the writ petition...
Kumar Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-22-2016
(Prayer: Criminal appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the Judgment dated 07.10.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.91 of 2009 by the Principal District and Sessions Court, Pudukkottai.) A.Selvam, J. 1. Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to the convictions and sentences dated 07.10.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.91 of 2009 by the Principal District and Sessions Court, Pudukkottai. 2. The case of the prosecution is that prior to occurrence a tussle has arisen between the accused and deceased at the time of seeing a drama in the village. Under the said circumstances, with intention to murder the deceased, on 20.08.2009, at about 06.00 a.m., the accused has tried to attack the de facto complainant by name Rajendran in the place of occurrence with the intention to bring the deceased to the place of occurrence and during the course of occurrence the accused has attacked one Arumugham @ Ayyar and also during the course of occurrence the accused...
The Director of Matriculation Schools Vs. Ilm Matriculation School
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-22-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order made in W.P.(MD)No.12065 of 2015, dated 23.07.2015.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Mr.V.M.Bala Mohan Thambi, learned counsel, has entered appearance for the sole respondent/writ petitioner. By consent, the writ appeal is taken up for final disposal, at the stage of admission itself. 2. The respondent school is run by Ilm Educational Development Trust. It was established from the academic year 2014-15, as per the norms prescribed in the Code for Regulation of Matriculation Schools and various Government Orders. The school has constructed a building, in a vast extent of 6 acres, which is more than the requisite land area (3 acres) as per G.O.(2D)No.48, School Education Department, dated 21.07.2004, prescribed for rural areas. The school has constructed area of 12,934 sq.ft., with all infrastructural facilities with reference to Class Rooms, Furniture, Laboratory, Library and Sanitary facilities, etc., pursuant to the app...