Chennai Madurai Court July 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.
A. Soosai Raj Vs. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Chennai and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to hand-over the deposited anount to the Petitioner as a nominee, deposited by the Petitioner's deceased brother Thanislas in S.B.No.10704 and the Fixed Deposit Account Nos.688 and 780 under the second respondent's Co-operative Society and to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 12.3.2016.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. Accounting to the Petitioner, his brother Thanislas, son of Antony and his Ambika residing at Kattuvilai, Kanyakumari District, do not have any children. In fact, his brother Thanislas had operated a Savings Account and further, he deposited money in Fixed Deposits in Irenipuram Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, Killiyoor, Killiyoor Post, Kanyakumari District. His brot...
M. Angelin Louisa Vs. The Secretary to Government, Rural Development a ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
(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 enquiry report passed by the 4th respondent in his proceedings Nil dated 20.06.2016 and the consequential impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings R.o.c.No.N2/32356/2015 dated 30.06.2016 (both the impugned order served to the petitioner on 04.07.2016) and quash the same as illegal.) 1. The petitioner herein, who suffered disciplinary proceedings for two counts of charges, submitted a detailed explanation to the charge memo, dated 20.02.2015, on 07.04.2016, refuting all the allegations mentioned in the charge memo, but, the Disciplinary Authority, on the premise that the petitioner has suppressed some of the vital information at the time of getting appointment on compassionate grounds, appointed an Enquiry Officer, who in turn, submitted his Enquiry Report. Assailing the correctness of the Enquiry Repo...
Nagoorkani Vs. Rajaraman and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
(Prayer:Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying this Court to punish the respondents for their wilful disobedience in the implementation of the order of this Court made in W.P:(MD)No.17510 of 2014, dated 30.10.2014.) 1. According to the Learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondents 1 to 3, the order passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.17510 of 2014, dated 30.10.2014 was complied with by the Second Respondent by means of proceedings, dated 15.07.2016. 2. It appears that the Second Respondent had stated in his proceedings, dated 15.7.2016, inter-alia to the effect that as per Panchayat Resolution No.26, dated 13.06.2014, the Plan Approval was cancelled and further, in respect of Survey numbers of the proceedings, there are no new constructions and as such, the request of the Petitioner was rejected. 3. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner informs this Court that this Court's order, dated 30.10.2014, passed in W.P(MD)No.175...
Mani Vs. The District Collector, Theni and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from disturbing the Petitioner's bore-well and Round-well situated at S.No.860/5, Patta No.1658, situated at Megamalai Village, Andipatti Taluk, Theni District based on the Petitioner's representation dated 27.06.2016.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. In view of the fact that the Petitioner in the Writ Petition affidavit at Para 6 had stated that in the year 2011, the State Government conducted the Panchayat election and he and his brother were working in favour of the Opposite Party and for that vengeance, the Second Respondent Village Panchayat President, gave trouble without any proper and valid reason and in this regard, the Petitioner has made a representation to the District Collector and to the Vi...
Chellappan Vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police, Gandarvak ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed in Special S.C.No.1/2013, dated 25.03.2015 by the Mahila Court, Pudukottai.) 1. The appellant herein was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Pudukkottai, in Special Sessions Case No.1 of 2013, for charges under Sections-376 IPC r/w Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012. The learned trial Judge found the appellant/accused guilty of the charges under Sections 4 and 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment under Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment; and five years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year....
Arunkumar Vs. The State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Madurai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
(Prayer:Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., calling for the records pertaining to Crl.M.P.No.2746 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai and set aside the 5th condition imposed in Crl.M.P.No.2746 of 2016 dated 20.06.2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai.) 1. The de facto complainant in a criminal case aggrieved by certain portion of the conditions imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai in ordering the return of property / vehicle in Crl.M.P.No.2746 of 2016 has directed this revision. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the impugned order and the materials on record. 3. The revision petitioner is the de facto complainant. It is stated already that he has suffered by the criminal act committed by the accused persons, now by certain onerous conditions imposed upon him by the Court, he has to suffer still further. 4. The de facto complainant is the owner cum driver of the TATA India Car TN 58 AL 1191...
Ponnaiah Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichy and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representations of the Petitioner dated 20.6.2016 and 8.7.2016 sent for the purpose of correcting the father's name of the Petitioner as Ponnaiah in the Patta and Chitta in respect of S.No.316/4 measuring an extent of 1 acre 48 cents out of total extent of 2 acre 96 cents(1.20.00 hectares) situated at Ikkaraikosikurichi Village, Kallupatti, Marungapuri Taluk,Trichy District, originally under Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District, within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. According to the Petitioner, he is the absolute owner of the land in S.No.316/4, measuring an extent of 1 acre and 48 cents, out of total extent of 2 acre and 96 ...
C. Manickavasagam Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transpor ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to pay the retirement benefits with interest to the petitioner in view of the representation dated 04.08.2016.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondent Transport Corporation. Seeking his retirement benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the issue is covered by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, dated 12.06.2015. He has further submitted that the respondent would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Honourable Division Bench. 3. For ready reference, the judgment, dated 12.06.2015, passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, is extracted hereunder: "The learned Additional Advocate General submits th...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-18-2016
M. Venugopal, J. 1. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for Respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5 and also the Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Fourth Respondent / Executive Officer of the Temple. 2. It comes to be known that the Petitioner in all had remitted / paid a sum of Rs.6,18,168/-, before the Fourth Respondent / Kattalai, which fact is not in dispute. 3. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has complied with the order of this Court, dated 12.07.2016, by paying a sum of Rs.6,18,168/-, and accordingly filed a 'Compliance Memo', dated 18.07.2016, before this Court and the same is hereby recorded by this Court. 4. Further, in the present case, it transpires that on 27.06.2016, the possession of the subject properties was taken by the Fifth Respondent / Assistant Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. The Learned Co...
S. Rajapadmanaban Vs. The Deputy Tahsildar, Office of the Registration ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 10.5.2016 for the notice given on 5.5.2016 by the third respondent with regard to the registration of Release Deed, dated 10.3.2016 and to pass orders within the time frame specified by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. According to the Petitioner/husband, he presented a Release Deed with sufficient stamps before the Third Respondent/The Sub-Registrar, Andipatti Sub-Registrar's Office, Theni District on 10.3.2016. As a family arrangement, to avoid future problems among the members, his wife has released her rights in the properties and his ancestral origin and in his hotel business related properties. The Third Respondent has kept the regis...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »