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.
N. Nethaji Vs. The District Collector, Dindigul and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-05-2016
(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 renew the lease period to the petitioner upto the period of 31.12.2017 namely the validity of Drug licence issued by the licensing authority and pass further orders as this may deem fit and proper.) The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to renew the lease period to the petitioner upto the period of 31.12.2017 namely the validity of Drug licence issued by the licensing authority. 2. The only point which has been raised by the petitioner is that the shop was prematurely closed without giving any notice and he has already sought for a alternative place, but, the same has not been considered so far. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent contended that as per the earlier order of this Court in W.A(MD)Nos.247 to 249 of 2015 dated 09.04.2015, all other shop...
M/s. Innovaa Inkjet Technology, Rep.by its Proprietor S. Saravanan Vs. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-05-2016
(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 in CST 1079517/2013-14 dated 27.01.2016 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and clear violation of principles of natural justice and further direct the respondent to pass an order afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of issuing notice and personal hearing and pass further orders as this may deem fit and proper.) 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in CST 1079517/2013-14 dated 27.01.2016 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and clear violation of principles of natural justice and further direct the respondent to pass an order afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of issuing notice and personal hearing. 2. The only contention raised by the petitioner is that the impugned order was passed without notice which is in violation of prin...
Arulmigu Sri Meenaksi Sundareswarar Devasthanam, Madurai, through its ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-05-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to dispose of E.P.No.77 of 2006 in O.S.No.123 of 1970 on the file of I Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, within a time frame fixed by this court.) 1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed for a direction to the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, to dispose of E.P.No.77 of 2006 in O.S.No.123 of 1970, within the stipulated period of time. 2. The revision petitioner / plaintiff filed E.P.No.77 of 2006 for execution of decree dated 23.12.1978. The said Execution Petition was dismissed. Against that order, the petitioner filed Civil Revision Petition in CRP(MD).Nos.987 to 989 of 2010. This Court set aside the order of dismissal passed in the Execution Petition and restored the Execution Petition. The Hon'ble Apex Court confirmed the order of this Court. According to the petitioner, in spite of the order passed by this Court and Hon'ble Apex Court, the Execution Petition is kept pen...
The Management, Thirunelveli District Vs. V. Arasi and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-05-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's compensation Act, against the order passed by the Hon'ble Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Thirunelveli, in W.C.No.15 of 2010 (Non-fatal) dated 12.08.2014.) 1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Thirunelveli, in W.C.No.15 of 2010 (Non-fatal) dated 12.08.2014. 2. The appellant is the first respondent in W.C.No.15 of 2010. After the death of Hariharsuthan, who was the first petitioner, the respondents 1 and 2 herein were impleaded as petitioners 1 and 2. The third respondent is the Contractor of appellant and the second respondent in W.C. 3. The facts of the case are as follows:- The deceased Hariharasuthan herein after referred as Worker was working in construction work under third respondent, who is the Contractor of the appellant. He was paid Rs.300/- per day. On 15.06.2009 at 9.30 am when he was doing work of appellant as per instruction...
Prabhu @ Hamsa @ Abdul Azeez and Another Vs. State Represented by, The ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-05-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., praying to call for the entire records pertaining to the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagercoil in Cr.M.P.No.320 of 2016 in S.C.No.163 of 2014 dated 14.03.2016 and set aside the same.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to call for the entire records pertaining to the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagercoil in Cr.M.P.No.320 of 2016 in S.C.No.163 of 2014 dated 14.03.2016 and set aside the same. 2. The petitioners are facing trial in S.C.No.163 of 2014 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagercoil for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 342, 307, 153A, 120(b) r/w 34 IPC. There are totally five accused and apart from these two petitioners, there are three other accused in the case. 3. It is seen that one Mr.G.Chandrasekhar, Advocate had filed m...
Valliammal Vs. Sheik Peer Mohammed
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-05-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records in E.P.No.11 of 2013 in O.S.No.24 of 2008 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Ambasamudram and struck of the same.) 1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed to call for the records in E.P.No.11 of 2013 in O.S.No.24 of 2008 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Ambasamudram and struck of the same. 2. The revision petitioner is the defendant. The respondent is the plaintiff. The petitioner filed present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India to strike off Execution Petition filed by the respondent. 3. The respondent / plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.24 of 2008, based on the equitable mortgage created by petitioner for a decree and directing the petitioner to pay the amounts due under mortgage, within the time limit fixed by the Court, failing which prayed for sale of mortgaged property and if sale proceeds are not sufficient to...
Pachchaikani Vs. Sermakkani
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-05-2016
(Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 115 of the Constitution of India, against the order passed in E.A.No.10 of 2011 in E.P.No.64 of 2009 in O.S.No.386 of 2006, dated 23.03.2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Virudhunagar.) This memorandum of Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order, dated 23.03.2011, passed in E.A.No.10 of 2011 in E.P.No.64 of 2009 in O.S.No.386 of 2006, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Virudhunagar. 2. The petitioner filed E.A.No.10 of 2011 for stay of E.P.No.64 of 2009 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Virudhunagar till the disposal of O.S.No.7 of 2011 filed by one Karuppasamy. The respondent filed O.S.No.386 of 2006 against the petitioner for redemption of mortgage. An exparte decree was passed on 16.07.2007 and the petitioner filed I.A.No.750 of 2009 to condone the delay in filing the application to set aside the exparte preliminary decree passed in O.S.No.386 of 2006. The said application was d...
S. Ganapathy Vs. N. Senthilvel
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-05-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records and set aside the Judgment passed in C.C.No. 337 of 2013, dated 17.06.2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirunelveli.) 1. Crl.A.(MD).No.99 of 2015 was directed against the judgment of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirunelveli in C.C.No.337 of 2013 dated 17.6.2014, in and by which, the respondent in the appeal was acquitted on finding that the respondent/accused was not guilty of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. The appellant in the present appeal was the complainant before the Lower Court. As against the acquittal, he filed the present appeal under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. The papers in the appeal were presented before this Court on 20.10.2014. The Registry raised an objection as to how the appeal was maintainable, as it was filed beyond 60 days as laid down under Section 378(5) of Cr.P.C. 3. The counsel for the appellant pro...
Yesubakthan Vs. Ujaila Rani
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-04-2016
(Prayer: Appeal under Section 55 of the Indian Divorce Act, against the fair and decretal order, dated 28.02.2014, passed in I.D.O.P.No.189 of 2012 by the learned District Judge, Nagercoil.) 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the fair and decretal order, dated 28.02.2014, passed in I.D.O.P.No.189 of 2012, by the learned District Judge, Nagercoil. 2. The appellant is the husband and the respondent is the wife. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 26.02.2001. Two female children were born on 29.12.2002 and 26.12.2007 in the wedlock. Due to dispute, both were living separately. The appellant/husband filed I.D.O.P.No.189 of 2012 before the District Court, Nagercoil, for dissolution of marriage. The learned District Judge, Nagercoil, dismissed the said I.D.O.P. on 28.02.2014. Against the said dismissal order, the present civil miscellaneous appeal is filed. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, both the parties a...
S. Mariappan Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-04-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to transfer the investigation in Crime No.301 of 2015 from the file of the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent police for going ahead with the course of investigation of the said case.) 1. This petition has been filed to transfer the investigation in Crime No.301 of 2015 from the file of the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent police for going ahead with the course of investigation of the said case. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. Taking into consideration the nature of allegations in the FIR in Crime No.301 of 2015, this is not a fit case to transfer the case from the file of the 2nd respondent to the file of the 3rd respondent. It will be in the interest of justice, if the case in Crime No.301 of 2016 is directed to be monitored by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ambasamudram Sub-Division. 4. Accordingly, the...