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.
S.G. Subbaraja Vs. The Superintending Engineer TANGEDCO-Tirunelveli an ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to keep the space between the Sankarankovil Rajapalayam High Road and buildings with D.No.93 and the space between the same road and building with D.No.203 by removing any obstruction and to keep and monitor the said space as vacant in Sankarankovil Municipality limit in Tirunelveli District and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to keep the space between the Sankarankovil Rajapalayam High Road and buildings with D.No.93 and the space between the same road and building with D.No.203 by removing any obstruction and to keep and monitor the said space as vacant in Sankarankovil Municipality limit in Tirunelveli District. 2. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, earlier he filed a suit in O.S.No....
The National Insurance Company Limited, Rep. by its Branch Manager Vs. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 24.06.2014 in MCOP.No.30 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Court for Forest Offence Cases, Nagercoil.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the award made in MCOP.No.30 of 2009 dated 24.06.2014, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Court for Forest Offence Cases, Nagercoil, the appellant has filed this appeal. As the challenge is limited only to quantum of compensation of Rs.14,71,800/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum, awarded to the legal representatives of the deceased, there is no need to advert to the finding of the Tribunal, fixing negligence on the driver of the offending vehicle, insured with the appellant company and the consequential liability. 2. Though several grounds have been raised in the memorandum of appeal, assailing the correctness of the impugned judgment, Mr.D.Sivaraman, learned counsel for the appellant confined ...
Vijayendran Vs. SajjanSingh. R.Chavan
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the Contemnor/ first respondent for the wilful disobedience of the order of this Court in M.P(MD)No.1 of 2015 in W.P.(MD)No.18361 of 2015 dated 02.12.2015.) 1. This petition is filed to punish the contemner, the respondent for the willful disobedience of the order in M.P(MD)No.1 of 2015 in W.P.(MD)No.18361 of 2015 dated 02.12.2015. 2.When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/contemnor that the order passed by this Court in M.P(MD)No.1 of 2015 in W.P.(MD)No.18361 of 2015, dated 02.12.2015, has been complied with. 3. Recording the submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/contemnor this contempt petition is closed. No costs....
Petitioner vesus Respondents:------
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
1. It is seen that Mr.S.J.Sundar Singh is an accused in Crime No.201 of 2006 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Navalpattu Police Station, Tiruchirappalli, challenging which, he has filed Crl.O.P.(MD) No.611 of 2011 for quashing the same. During the pendency of Crl.O.P.(MD) No.611 of 2011, Mr.S.J.Sundar Singh has filed the present miscellaneous petition, which is in SR stage, for the following prayer: ...Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to direct the R-2 to explain the circumstances and furnish the copies of the documents collected by him from the Factory on 25/1/2016.... 2. Office entertained doubts about the maintainability of this petition and hence, the matter was posted for deciding the issue of maintainability before this Court on 22.03.2016. 3. Heard Mr.S.J.Sundar Singh, Party-in-Person, who reiterated the stand taken by him in the petition. It is Mr.Sundar Singh's contention that Mr.C.S.Sivakumar, Joint General Manager, Ordnance Factory, Trichy (R2) had collected ...
The Branch Manager, Iffco Tokyo General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sam ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 26.08.2015 in MCOP.No.639 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Additional District Judge, Tirunelveli.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal, is to the finding fixing negligence on the driver of the bus bearing registration No.TN-72-D-5733, insured with the appellant company and the quantum of compensation of Rs.15,67,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum, awarded to the legal representatives of the deceased Murugan by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Additional District Court, Tirunelveli, in the judgment and decree made in MCOP.No.639 of 2014, dated 26.08.2015. 2. Facts leading to the appeal are that on 30.03.2014, Murugan, aged about 40 years, working as a driver cum customer service crew in Marrybrown at Tirunelveli, was riding a motor cycle bearing registration No.TN-72-AH-6878. Near a Tower, at Palayamcottai, a bus bearing registration...
Raviselvan, S/o.Ramachandiran Vs. Varatharaja Bhoopathy and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of C.P.C., to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 08.12.2015, passed by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil, made in I.A.No.125 of 2014 in A.S.No.79 of 2013.) 1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 08.12.2015, passed by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil, made in I.A.No.125 of 2014 in A.S.No.79 of 2013. 2. The petitioner is the third party in A.S.No.79 of 2013. The petitioner filed I.A.No.125 of 2014, for impleading himself as a party respondent to the appeal, on the ground that he is the subsequent purchaser and therefore, he is necessary party to decide the issue. The learned Judge considering all the materials on record, dismissed the application holding that for the issue involved in the first appeal, the respondent is not a necessary party. Against the said order of dismissal, the present civil revision petition is filed. 3....
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Kumbakonam, rep. by its Branch Manage ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 30.06.2014 in MCOP.No.369 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal Sub Judge, Kumbakonam.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the award made in MCOP.No.369 of 2012, dated 30.06.2014, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal Sub Judge, Kumbakonam the appellant has filed this appeal. As the challenge is limited only to quantum of compensation of Rs.13,56,000/- with interest, @ 7.5% per annum, awarded to the legal representatives of the deceased, there is no need to advert to the finding of the Tribunal, fixing negligence on the driver of the offending vehicle, insured with the appellant company and the consequential liability. 2. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.13,56,000/- with interest, @ 7.5% per annum under the following heads:- Loss of income=Rs.12,96,000/-Loss of love and affection=Rs. 50,000/-Funeral expenses=Rs. 10,000/...
NSVPV, Palanivel Rajan, Sivagangai District Vs. The Director, Director ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2016 and pass orders by this Court as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petitionis for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2016. 2. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner has already made a representation to the Chief Minister's Cell which has been forwarded to the District Collector, Sivagangai District, who in turn forwarded the same to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai, has initiated the proceedings dated 09.02.2016 directing the petitioner as well as the fifth respondent to appear in person before him on 16.02.2016 . 4. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of wit...
Alagammal and Others Vs. Sundaram
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal order dated 11.01.2016, passed by the learned District Munsif, Palani, in I.A.No.914 of 2015 in O.S.No.277 of 2010.) 1. This memorandum of Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the fair and decretal order dated 11.01.2016, made in I.A.No.914 of 2015 in O.S.No.277 of 2010, passed by the learned District Munsif, Palani, 2. The petitioners are defendants and the respondent is the plaintiff in the Suit. The plaintiff filed the Suit in O.S.No.277 of 2010, for declaration and permanent injunction. The respondent filed an application in I.A.No.640 of 2010 in O.S.No.277 of 2010, for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner. That application was ordered and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and he inspected the suit property on 11.08.2012 and filed his report on 26.11.2012. The petitioners filed written statement. The trial was commenced and the respondent wa...
Senthil Agro Products, rep by its Manager, S. Sivamurugan Vs. S. Renuk ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records in S.T.C.No.3350 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur and quash the same in so far as the Petitioners are concerned.) 1. This petition has been filedto call for the records in S.T.C.No.3350 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur and quash the same in so far as the Petitioners are concerned. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent. 3. On 24.02.2015, the Agriculture Officer visited Senthil Agro Products Distributor/Dealer, No.1/5049/1, Rosalpatti, Virudhunagar (A3/1st petitioner herein) and took samples of certain insecticides in terms of Section 22(5) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (in short the Act, 1968), which, when analyzed, were found to be misbranded and was of substandard quality. The Assistant Director of Agriculture, Paramathi issued a show cau...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »