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.
M. Jahir Hussain Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint preferred to the 1st respondent by the petitioner dated 17.3.2016 against the proposed accused persons for the offences punishable U/s.147 148 294(b) 341 and 506(i) of IPC.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint preferred to the 1st respondent by the petitioner dated 17.3.2016 against the proposed accused persons for the offences punishable U/s.147 148 294(b) 341 and 506(i) of IPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that on the complaint dated 17.03.2016, given by the petitioner, a case has already been registered in Crime No.106 of 2016 on 02.04.2016 for offences under Sections 147, 148, 448, 380 and 506(ii) IPC and Section 3(1) of TNPPDL Act. The said statement is recorded. 3. In view of the above statem...
Venkatesan Vs. Mohammed Nazeer, The Inspector of Police, Sivagangai Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for the wilful disobedience of the order dated 26.03.2015 by this Court passed in Crl.O.P(MD)No.4347 of 2015.) 1. It is represented by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent that the order passed by this Court has been complied with by registering F.I.R for the offence under Section 379 IPC (NH) in Crime No.225 of 2015 dated 06.06.2014 on the file of the respondent police. 2. Recording the submissions made by both sides, the contempt petition is closed....
P. Siva Chidambaram Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi and ...
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 respondents 1 to 3 not to harass the petitioner and his family members under the guise of enquiry based on the complaint given by the 4th respondent.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 not to harass the petitioner and his family members under the guise of enquiry based on the complaint given by the 4th respondent. 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 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 ...
C. Bala Murugan Vs. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Madurai and A ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents herein to register an FIR under the complaint of the petitioner dated 23.03.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents herein to register an FIR under the complaint of the petitioner dated 23.03.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that the complaint dated 23.03.2016 has been sent by post to the 1st respondent. 3. In view of the above submission, the petitioner is directed to appear in person before the 2nd respondent along with this order and lodge a fresh complaint, containing the very same contents as stated in the previous complaint dated 23.03.2016. On receipt of such complaint, the same shall be enquired into and action be taken thereon in accordance with law, if it discloses the commission of a cognizable offence or drop action otherwise. With the above direction, this Cri...
Amsavalli @Amuthayammal Vs. M/s. Anakainu Manufacturing, rep. through ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the Judgment and Decree in M.C.O.P.No. 867 of 2009 on the file of Motor Accident claims Tribunal/Addl. District and Sessions Court/Fast Track Court No.3, Madurai dated 04.10.2011.) 1. The claimant is on appeal challenging the award dated 04.10.2011 made in M.C.O.P.No. 867 of 2009 on the file of Motor Accident claims Tribunal/Addl. District and Sessions Court/Fast Track Court No.3, Madurai. 2. The appellant is the claimant. The first respondent is owner of the vehicle which is involved in the accident and second respondent is the insurer of the vehicle. 3. The facts of the case:- On 02.03.2008, when the appellant was waiting for the bus at Chinthamani bus stop, a goods vehicle belonging to the first respondent bearing registration No. TN 59 AH 2831 was driven in a rash and negligent manner in a high speed and dashed against the appellant and she suffered injuries. She was admitted on the sa...
Marimuthu Vs. The District Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram an ...
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 in the guise of an enquiry without following due process of law.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner in the guise of an enquiry without following due process of law. 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 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 dire...
Ganesh Kumar Vs. State represented by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Siv ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry on the complaint of one Karnan and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and thus render justice.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry on the complaint of one Karnan. 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 on the complaint given by one Karnan, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed. 3. Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this Criminal Original Petition is closed....
Nagu and Others Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District an ...
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 Petitioners except according to due process of law and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd Respondent not to harass the Petitioners except according to due process of law and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 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 the defacto complainant against this petitioner, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.109 of 2016 under Section 366(A) IPC against one Palanisamy, who is th...
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Chennai and Others Vs. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause XV of Letters of Patent, against the interim order of this Court, dated 27.10.2016 in W.M.P.(MD)No.1468 of 2016 in W.P.(MD)No.1706 of 2016.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. In the present writ appeal, the challenge made is to the order passed by the Writ Court, directing the appellants to grant temporary approval for appointment of the first respondent as a Secondary Grade Teacher, in the second respondent School and to pay salary to her from the date of her appointment, till the date of disposal of the writ petition. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the parties in the appeal, have consented that, they are agreeable that the order passed in W.A.(MD) No.220/2016 dated 05.02.2016, be passed in the present appeal also, details of which are given below. Thus, by consent, the present appeal is taken up and disposed of. 3. On an earlier occasion, a similar Writ Appeal (MD) No.220 of 2016, filed by the State, has been considered and disposed of on 05.02.2016 by ...
S. Varadharajan and Another Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Pudukott ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-21-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register the case in pursuant to the complaint given by the petitioner date 14.03.2016 against the said Perumal and Chellappa.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register the case in pursuant to the complaint given by the petitioner date 14.03.2016 against the said Perumal and Chellappa. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner, petition enquiry is pending. 3. In view of the above submission, the 2nd respondent is directed to expedite the enquiry and complete the same within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall co-operate in the enquiry. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, the respondent police shall take action in accordance with...