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.
Sankaranarayanan Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Princ ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the recordspertaining to the impugned order passed by the 3rdrespondent in letter No.AG(A and E) legal Cell/WP(MD) 11094-11101/2008/1178 dated 17.9.2014 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to sanction and pay him pension by taking into account of service rendered by him prior to 01.06.1995 in the post of Village Assistant.) Common Order: Since the issue raised in all the Writ Petitions is one and the same, they have been taken up together and disposed of, by this common order: 2. Challenging the orders of the third respondent dated 17.09.2014, in any by which, the request for revision of pension, was rejected by the respondents on the ground that the benefit granted through W.P.(MD).No.11094-11101 of 2008 dated 06.03.2009 cannot be extended to the petitioners herein, as the petitioners therein, namely, W.P.(MD).No.11094-11101 o...
Abdul Harim Vs. The District Collector, Trichy District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing 3rd Respondent to issue patta to the Petitioner in respect of the Petitioner's house situated in Door No.31/26, Santhosh Nagar, Ward No.35 of Trichy Municipal Corporation in pursuant to the Communication dated 13.11.2015 issued by the 1st Respondent to the 3rd Respondent and to issue patta to the Petitioner.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. According to the petitioner, he is a physically challenged person and his daughter is also a physically challenged person. Therefore, he made a request to the State Government in the year 1985 to allot a land for construction of small house on the ground that he is a physically challenged poor person. In fact, the third respondent/Tahsildar, Trichy East, by his proceedings dated 02.09.1987, sent a communication to the Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu stating that steps were taken to convert the said land as 'Natham' and thereafter,...
Sakthivel Vs. State, rep.by Inspector of Police, Pudukkottai District ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi, in Cr.M.P.No.3248 of 2016 and set aside the order, dated 07.06.2016.) 1. The revision petitioner, who is the father of the accused, aggrieved by the dismissal of his property return petition in Cr.M.P.No.3248 of 2016, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi, has directed this revision. 2. It is alleged that on 29.05.2016, at North Ammapattinam, the accused, who is the revision petitioner's son attempted on the life of the second respondent's son, namely, Surender, by running over a Car (TN01 AP8853). On the complaint of the second respondent, Manamelkudi Police registered a case in Crime No.114 of 2016, under Section 307 I.P.C. 3. The Police seized the said Car (TN01 AP8853). It has become the case- property. The father of the accused filed Crl.M.P.No.3248 of 2016 for interim custody of the Car to him. 4. The learned Judicial Ma...
R. Sreedharan Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Co ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to settle payment of a. Gratuity amount Rs.3,44,744/- b.Earned Leave c.Medical Leave d.Provident Fund Rs.3,85,791/- e.Employees Retirement Benefit Scheme (ERBS) f.Institute of Road and Transport Technology (IRTT) Fund g.Settlement benefits and other retiral benefits payable to the petitioner with reasonable rate of interest.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondents 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 respondents 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 respondents would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Honourable ...
K.R. Ramammal Vs. The Tahsildar, Virudhunagar District and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents herein to make necessary entries in the revenue records and in town survey register by entering the petitioner name in the A-Register and 10(1) Adangal for the property comprised in S.No. 513/3B, 514/2A in Pudupalayam Village of Rajapalayam Town and to issue A-Register and 10(1) Adangal Extract to the petitioner herein within a stipulated period.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. According to the petitioner, the property comprised in Sy.No.513/3 and 514/2A of Pudupalayam Village, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhunagar District, belonged to her husband Ramakrishnama Raja and in fact, her husband got the said property by means of family partition. During his life time, he was in exclusive possession and enjoyment over the same. Because of his old age and with a view to give some property to her, for her livelihood, her husband executed a registered Will in her favour on ...
Saravana Pandian Vs. The Government of Tamilnadu, Rep. by its Principa ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in Nada.Na.Ka.No.8078/2015/L5, dated 12.05.2016, quash the same.) 1. The Petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition praying for passing of an order by this Court in calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the Second Respondent, dated 12.05.2016 and to quash the same. 2. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the impugned order, dated 12.05.2016 passed by the Second Respondent/Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, is in violation of the Principles of Natural Justice. 3. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner urges before this Court that the Second Respondent failed to appreciate that although the Trustees are under suspension, they are entitled to notice before an appointment of 'Executive Officer', as the same would...
Mariyappan Vs. The Sub Inspector of Police, Srivilliputtur Town Police ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to set aside the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Srivilliputtur in Crl.M.P.No.1503 of 2016 on 01.04.2016 and allow this Criminal Revision Petition.) 1. Mariappan, who is the defacto complainant in Crime No.90 of 2016, registered by Srivilliputtur Town Police, aggrieved by the dismissal of his return of property petition filed in Crl.M.P.No.1503 of 2016, has directed this revision. 2. In February 2016, Mariappan sustained injuries in a road accident. He was taking treatment in the Government Headquarters Hospital, Srivilliputtur. While he was in the hospital, on 01.02.2016, his ATM card was missing on 12.02.2016. He complained to Srivilliputhur Town Police. This case was registered. In the course of investigation, respondents 2 and 3 / A1 and A2, were arrested. 3. Based on the confessional statement of A1, the following properties were seized by the police:- 1. Gold chain weighing 8.200...
K. Pandi Vs. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant 5th Review Benefits and to Revise the Petitioner pay in the post of Checking Inspector with retrospective effect from 20.09.2013 in term of Government order in G.O.Ms.No.61 Transport (C) Department dated 30.04.2015 and as per the 12(3) settlement dated 22.01.2011 and further directing the Respondents to pay the difference in salary and to pay difference in Retirement Benefits including difference amount in monthly pension Gratuity, Commuted value of pension, leave salary and all other attendant benefits payable to me from 20.09.2013 to 31.05.2014 together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondents Transport Corporation. Seeking his benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have not given the benefits both und...
N. Manonmony Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Cor ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to settle payment of a. Gratuity amount Rs.4,42,887/- b.Earned Leave 125 days c.Medical Leave-35 days d. Provident Fund Rs.3,11,549/- e.Employees Retirement Benefit Scheme (ERBS) f.Institute of Road and Transport Technology (IRTT) Fund g.Settlement benefits and other retiral benefits payable to the petitioner with reasonable rate of interest.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondents 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 respondents 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 respondents would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed ...
Radha Vs. The District Collector, Pudukottai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-15-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records of the 3rd respondent to give electricity service connection to the petitioners house comprised in S.F.No.206/2 of Mattur Village, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukottai District.) 1. These writ petitions have been filed for providing electricity connection to the petitioners herein. 2. Since the issue involved in all the Writ Petitions are one and the same, these matters are taken up together and disposed of, by this common order. 3. The petitioners are said to be in possession and enjoyment of the houses situated in S.F.No.206/2 of Mattur Village, Pudhukottai District. According to the petitioners, they have made individual representation on 27.03.2016 to the third respondent herein seeking electricity service connection. Since the same has not been considered, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in similar...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »