Chennai Madurai Court April 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.
T. Muniyathurai Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Tuticorin District a ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-22-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner and his namely Nagarani wife based on the repeated false and frivolous complaints lodged by one S.Ganapathy Pattar/ the defacto complainant.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner and his namely Nagarani wife based on the repeated false and frivolous complaints lodged by one S.Ganapathy Pattar/ the defacto complainant. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, who would submit that on the complaint given by one Ganapathy Pattar, petition enquiry is pending. 3. Recording the said submission, this petition is closed....
Pandithomas Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindi ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-22-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case based upon the petitioner's complaint dated 25.3.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case based upon the petitioner's complaint dated 25.3.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, who would submit that on the complaint dated 25.03.2016, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed. A copy of the Closure Report has been filed before this Court. Recording the same, this Criminal Original Petition is closed....
Selvi @ Chennama Vs. Duraikannan
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-22-2016
(Prayer: This Transfer CMP is filed under Section 24 of CPC praying to withdraw the case in HMOP.No.603 of 2015 from the file of Family Court, Madurai and transfer the same to the file of I Additional Family Court, Chennai.) 1. The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw the case case in HMOP.No.603 of 2015 from the file of Family Court, Madurai and transfer the same to the file of I Additional Family Court, Chennai. 2. The petitioner herein is the wife and the respondent is the husband. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 08.12.2008, as per Hindu Rites and Customs. Two male children were born in the wedlock on 27.10.2009 and 21.12.2011 respectively. Due to the dispute, both are living separately. The respondent filed HMOP.No.603 of 2015 before the Family Court, Madurai, for divorce. The petitioner filed M.C.No.446 of 2015, before the I Additional Family Court, Chennai, seeking for maintenance. 3. According to the petitioner, she ...
Jeevana School Vs. The Commissioner, Madurai Municipal Corporation and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-22-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned demand notice of the respondents 1 and 2 dated 05.01.2016 and the consequential impugned proceedings of the second respondent dated 08.02.2016, quash the same.) 1. Challenging the demand of property tax issued by the respondent Corporation, the petitionerschool is before this Court. 2. The only contention which has been raised by the petitioner is that the respondent Corporation has no jurisdiction to levy property tax for the reason that as per Section 122 of the Madurai City Municipal Corporation Act the petitioner School is totally exempted from the purview of such tax. Further, the petitioner school has got huge buildings which are not assessed to property tax as per Section 122 (c) of the Municipal City Municipal Corporation Act, 1971. They are exempted from payment of property tax and there are no other enabling prov...
Chanthirasekaran Vs. State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Mad ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-22-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the entire records connected with the case in Crime No.750 of 2012 pending on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the entire records connected with the case in Crime No.750 of 2012 pending on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.750 of 2012 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 447 and 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act, has been registered against the petitioner/accused. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioner/accused and the second respondent, appeared in persons and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor through the respondent police, namely, Kalimuthu, Special Sub-Inspector of Police, K.Pudur Police Statio...
R. Nallamuthu and Others Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-22-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent forthwith to register an FIR on the complaint given by the petitioner dated 13.9.2015 on the basis of the direction issued in Crl.M.P.No.5823 of 2015 on the file of the learned J.M. No.II at Nagercoil dated 15.10.2015.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent forthwith to register an FIR on the complaint given by the petitioner dated 13.9.2015 on the basis of the direction issued in Crl.M.P.No.5823 of 2015 on the file of the learned J.M. No.II at Nagercoil dated 15.10.2015. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, who would submit that on the complaint dated 13.09.2016, given by the petitioner, a case has already been registered in Crime No.135 of 2016 on 05.04.2016 for offences under Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 506(ii), 354 and 34 IPC and Section 4 of TNPWH Act. The said statement is recorded. 3. In view ...
R. Lakshminarayanan Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-22-2016
(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to implement the communication dated 11.02.2015 sent by the Directorate of Tamil Development and to take appropriate steps to teach Tamil Language to Non Tamils throughout India by way of starting Correspondence Course through Thanjavur Tamil Univrsity within the time stipulated by this Court.) (Prayer amended vide Court order dated 26.11.2015 in M.P. NO. 1/2015) N. Kirubakaran, J. 1. What is the use of conducting World Tamil Conferences spending crores and crores of rupees, without serving for the cause of the language and what is the use of calling Tamil as a Classical Language, unless it is passed on to the next generation by Tamils? 2. Tamil is an ancient classical language, which has got a rich heritage and literature. The well-known Sangam Literature dates back to 300 BC to AD 300. The earliest Tamil literature, Tholgappiyam, which is an early work...
R. Kandasamy and Others Vs. The Commissioner and Special, Nungambakkam ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-22-2016
(Prayer: Petitions under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a (i) Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Head of the Department of Structural Engineering in Arulmigu Palaniandavar Polytechnic College, Palani by strictly following the seniority cum merit and in accordance with law (WP.(MD)No.9860 of 2007); (ii) Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the orders passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 19369/2009/Z3 dated 29.4.2009 and the third respondent in his proceedings in Letter No.1140/A4/2009 dated 15.4.2009, quash the same and direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as an Assistant as per Rules and confer all consequential benefits (WP(MD)No.6291 of 2009); and (iii) Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from in anyway filling up the post of Head of Department in all the Departments in the second respondent college (WP(MD)No.7640 of 20...
R. Selvalakshmi Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner and to pass other or further orders.) 1. This petition has been filedto direct the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would, on instructions from the respondent police, submit that neither a case nor a petition enquiry is pending against this petitioner on the file of the respondent police. 3. Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this Criminal Original Petition is closed....
Nathu K. Patel Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Trichy City and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State and perused the materials placed on record. 3. It is represented by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that, on the basis of the complaint given by one Periyasamy against this petitioner, petition enquiry is pending. 4. The petitioner is directed to participate in the enquiry and during enquiry, he shall not be harassed. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, the respondent police is free to register an FIR and this order shall not be a shield for the petitioner against arrest. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of....