Chennai Madurai Court March 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.
P. Saroja and Others Vs. S. Rengaraj and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer:Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order of the lower Court passed in E.A.No.575 of 1997 dated 13.09.2004 in E.P.No.164 of 1992 in O.S.No.599 of 1981 on the file of the First Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai and allow the same.) 1. This Civil Revision Petition is preferred by the petitioners against the order passed by the learned First Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, in E.A.No.575 of 1997 dated 13.09.2004 in E.P.No.164 of 1992 in O.S.No.599 of 1981, in dismissing the amendment application filed under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, to amend the Schedule of the property. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the trial Court failed to exercise the jurisdiction to amend the E.P and the power of the amendment is vested only with the trial Court. He would further submit that the trial Court failed to note that the respondents 2 and 3 in E.P are impleaded, in which, ...
S. Arockiyaporabu Vs. The Tahsildar, Ilayankudi Taluk, Sivagangai Dist ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to dispose of the petitioner's application dated 11.01.2016 submitted to the respondent for the demarcation of the property for issuing patta within a time frame as fixed by this Court.) The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to dispose of the petitioner's application dated 11.01.2016 submitted to the respondent for the demarcation of the property for issuing patta. 2. Mr.M.Rajarajan learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondent. 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner is disposed of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 5. In view of the limited scope of the prayer, the re...
M. Rajangam Vs. The District Revenue Officer, Collector Office, Trichy ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to effect corrections in the UDR entries of the petitioner's landed properties as per the recommendations made by the second respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.A3-1255-2015 dated 16.10.2015 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 05.03.2016 within a period that may be fixed by this Court.) The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Writ of Mandamus to directing the first respondent to effect corrections in the UDR entries of the petitioner's landed properties as per the recommendations made by the second respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.A3-1255-2015 dated 16.10.2015 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 05.03.2016. 2. Mr.S.Kumar learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. The learned counsel appearing on...
T. Veilumuthu and Others T.Thangamani and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer: This Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to call for the records pertaining to the Judgment and Decree, dated 26.03.2015 made in M.C.O.P.No.816 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District and Sessions Court cum Communal Classes Court at Madurai and praying to set aside the Decree and Judgment of the disallowed portion of compensation by allowing this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.) 1. The present appeal is filed by the claimants against the Award, dated 26.03.2015, made in M.C.O.P.No.816 of 2012, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District and Sessions Court-cum- Communal Classes Court at Madurai for enhancement of compensation. 2. The appellants are the claimants in MCOP No.816 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District and Sessions Court-cum-Communal Clashes Court at Madurai. The first respondent is the owner TVS Sports TN 58 Z 8554 involved in the accident, which was insured wi...
Vinith and Another Vs. State rep by the Inspector of Police, Kanniyaku ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to call for the records connected with the case in Crime No.109 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police in so far as the petitioners are concerned and quash the same as illegal.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to call for the records connected with the case in Crime No.109 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police in so far as the petitioners are concerned and quash the same as illegal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. It is seen that on the complaint lodged by the District Educational Officer, the respondent police have registered a case in Crime No.109 of 2015 on 23.11.2015 under Section 380 IPC. It is the case of the defacto complainant that laptops that were intended for distribution to poor school students were kept stored in the school godown and on opening the godown on ...
R. Muniyadi Vs. State rep. by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Virudhunaga ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to call for the records pertaining to the impugned FIR in Crime No.18 of 2015 on the file of the All Women Police Station, Srivilliputhur and quash the same as illegal as far as this petitioner is concerned.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to call for the records pertaining to the impugned FIR in Crime No.18 of 2015 on the file of the All Women Police Station, Srivilliputhur and quash the same as illegal as far as this petitioner is concerned. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would submit that charge sheet has already been filed in this case, which was taken on file in C.C.No.68 of 2016 by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Srivilliputhur. 3. Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this petition is closed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitio...
Sivasubramania Kathiriyasamy and Another Vs. Pappu and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to direct the learned learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Usilampatti to number the unnumbered I.A.No./2016 in I.A.No.354 of 2015 in O.S.No.159 of 2009 and dispose of the same on merits.) 1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed to direct the learned learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Usilampatti to number the unnumbered I.A.No./2016 in I.A.No.354 of 2015 in O.S.No.159 of 2009 and dispose of the same on merits. 2. The revision petitioners are defendants 1 and 3, the respondents 1 to 5 are plaintiffs and the 6th respondent is the 2nd defendant in the suit. 3. The petitioners filed this Civil Revision Petition against the order of return of application dated 22.03.2016 filed by petitioners for stay of ex parte decree. 4. The respondents 1 to 5/ plaintiffs filed a suit in O.S.No.159 of 2009, on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Cour...
Fathimal Beevi Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Paramakudi, Ramanat ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.L1.1241/2015 dated 21.01.2016 and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the second respondent to issue patta in respect of the land situated at Survey No.14 T.S.No.36, Block No.9, Ward G to the extent of 0.5 Hectares, in Kattuparamakudi, Revenue village, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District in the light of the decree passed by the District Munsif Court, Paramakudi in O.S.No.101 of 2005 within a period stipulated by this Court as this Court may deem fit and proper.) The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.L1.1241/2015 dated 21.01.2016 and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the s...
Pradeep Kumar and Others Vs. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Tr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to call for the records relating to the impugned FIR in Crime No.78 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to call for the records relating to the impugned FIR in Crime No.78 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. On reading of the complaint, there are prima facie materials for the investigation to progress. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a suit in O.S.No.451 of 2012 has been filed by A.Pari Ahamed (A5) against the defacto complainant and the same is pending on the file of the District Munsif Court, Trichirappalli. 5. The Investigating Officer is directed to take those factors into consideration and proceed with the investigation in accorda...
S. Balamurugan Vs. The Commissioner, Madurai City Municipal Corporatio ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned demand notice issued by the respondent dated 05.01.2016 in assessment No.44966 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to provide appropriate calculation with applying uniform method of assessment and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned demand notice issued by the respondent dated 05.01.2016 in assessment No.44966 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to provide appropriate calculation with applying uniform method of assessment. 2. Mr.R.Murali learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondent. By consent of both sides, this writ petition itself is taken up for hearing. 3. The order impugned in this writ petition is is...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »