Chennai Madurai Court August 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. James Vs. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay all the terminal benefits amount payable to the petitioner including Gratuity, Unavailed Leave Salary, Service-Surrender leave salary, Social Security Scheme amount, refund amount of Institute of Road Transport 12(3) Settlement arrears and Dearness allowance arrears together with 18% interest from the date of his retirement to till the date of payment and all other attendant benefits to the petitioner within the stipulated period.) 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 ...
R. Vairam Vs. V. Thenmozhi
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Sections 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C., against the order passed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madurai in Cr.M.P.No.222 of 2016 in C.A.No.6 of 2016 vide his order dated 30.03.2016 by which is so far as it relates to granting permission to the respondent to occupy the petitioner's house property situated at No.5/97 E, Ulaganeri, Narasingam Village, Y.Othakadai, Madurai (Residential Order) in terms of Section 16 r/w. 23(1) of the Protection Women Act, 2005.) Common Order: 1. Since these Crl.R.C. and Crl.O.Ps. are connected on factual matrix and legal issues, they are tagged together, heard together and being disposed of this common order. 2. Thenmozhi is the daughter of Veerapathiran. Karthick, who is the son of Rajendran and Vairam. On 22.01.2015, the marriage between the said Karthick and Thenmozhi took place. Unfortunately, the couples were not blessed with any children. However, they were afflicted with matrimoni...
The Administrator, MKN Madarsha Trusts Adirampattinam, Vs. The Directo ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(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 records relating to O.Mu.No.6760/A2/2012 dated 30.01.2013 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to approve the appointment of S.Kadir Mohideen as Library Assistant in Kadhir Mohideen College, Adirampattinam, Thanjavur with effect from 01.11.2012 with all consequential monetary and other service benefits.) Common Order 1. Challenging either the rejection/return of proposals of the respective minority schools, seeking to approve the appointments made by them for the Non Teaching Posts as against the sanctioned vacancies or seeking a direction to the official respondents to grant approval for the appointments made by such minority schools, these writ petitions have been filed. Approval has been rejected on the ground that prior permission should be obtained before filling up any vacancy in a s...
R. Ramasamy Vandayar Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur Dis ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to defer the appeal filed in Na.Ka.No.3303 of 2010 till the disposal of the civil suit pending between the parties.) 1. The petitioner filed this Writ Petition to direct the first respondent to defer the hearing of the appeal till the disposal of the civil suit pending before the civil court. 2. When the matter was taken up for consideration, learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that the civil suit in O.S.No.135 of 2010 has already been decreed by the District Munsif, Pattukottai. 3. The prayer is essentially to call upon the first respondent to defer the hearing of Appeal till the disposal of the civil suit. Since the civil suit has already been disposed of by the District Munsif, Pattukottai, I am of the view that there is no question of directing the first respondent to keep the appeal pending. It is always open to...
S. Thangapandi and Others Vs. The Management of Tamil Nadu State Trans ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to pay the petitioner Rs.1,81,580/- towards Leave salary together with 18% interest per annum along with interest amount towards the delayed payment of Gratuity amount Rs.4,51,569/- for the period from 01.04.13 to 25.05.2015 as per sec.7(3 A) of the payment of Gratuity Act and further directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to pay him interest amount towards the delayed payment of pension commutation amount Rs.2,45,806/- for the period from 01.04.13 to 30.10.13 at the rate of 18% interest within a time frame as may by fixed by this Court.) 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 ...
B. Arul Ananda Ganesh and Another Vs. The Secretary to Government, Edu ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(Prayer in W.P(MD)No.15474 of 2016 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS to direct the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment of petitioner as Office Assistant at 4th respondent school and consequently disburse all the service and monetary benefits from 19.05.2016 in accordance with the provisions Tamil Nadu Private School Regulation Act and Rules. Prayer in W.P(MD)No.15477 of 2016 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS to direct the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment of petitioner as Junior Assistant at 4th respondent school and consequently disburse all the service and monetary benefits from 19.05.2016 in accordance with the provisions Tamil Nadu Private School Regulation Act and Rules. ) Common Order 1. These writ petition have been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment of p...
R. Selvi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by The Secretary to Government, ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the entire records in detention order passed in Cr.M.P.No.12/2016, dated 02.06.2016 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and set aside the same as illegal and direct the Respondents to produce the body or person of the petitioner's husband namely Raja, S/o.Dharman, Male aged about 46 years, who is detained in Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli before this Court and set him at liberty.) K.K. Sasidharan, J. 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the wife of the detenu Raja, who is under detention, pursuant to the order passed by the second respondent dated 02.06.2016, in Cr.M.P.No.12/2016, under Section 2(b) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug-offenders, Forest-offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982, (Tamil Nadu Act 14 ...
S. Subramanian and Others Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukkot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to pass orders on its entirety of the Petitioners' representation, dated 28.06.2016, seeking house site patta, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main Writ Petitions itself are taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. According to the Petitioners, they do not have any own property in their names. In fact, the Petitioners are living in an ancestral house, which is in dilapidated condition. Also, it is represented that their brother Rajendran Chingaravelu, with their permission, had rebuilt their ancestral house, with his own funds, around the year 1996. 5. The main grievance of the Petitioners is that despite numerous representations, dated 17.03.2016, 06.06.2016 and 28.06.2016, addressed to the First Respondent / Revenue Divisional Officer...
J. Ilangovan Vs. The District Collector, Tuticorin District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd Respondent to register the 2nd Respondent order in Pa.Mu/1791 - 2004, dated 10.01.2007, based on the Petitioner's representation, dated 30.01.2016, within the stipulated period by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, 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 a daily wage worker and on 26.02.1990 one Kanakaraj executed a Sale Deed, in favour of his mother viz., Sudhanthiram Ammal, measuring an extent of 2 Acres 66 Cents of land in Survey No.654/1B, situated at Mullakadu Village, Tuticorin District, through Registered Sale Deed, bearing No.83/1993. After purchasing the property, all the revenue records changed in his mother's name and taxes paid in his mother's name. 5. The grievance of the Petitioner is that all of a sudden, ...
Hemantkumar Ptilokani and Others Vs. The State rep. by its the Deputy ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Common Prayer: Petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to call for the records relating to C.C.No.242 of 2015 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Srivilliputhur and quash the same.) 1. A1 to A3 filed Crl.O.P.(MD) 18274 of 2015, A4 accused filed Crl.O.P.(MD) 19972 of 2015, A5 to A8 filed Crl.O.P.(MD) 20845 of 2015 and A9 to A11 filed Crl.O.P.(MD) 21691 of 2015 to quash the charge sheet, filed by the 1st respondent under Section 103 (a)(c)(e) and 104 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 and under Sections 420, 482, 485, 486, 109 IPC in C.C.No.242 of 215 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Srivilliputhur. 2. Prior to that, A2 and A5 filed a petition to quash the FIR in Crime No. 356 of 2014. At that time when the matter was taken up for hearing, as the final report had been filed before J.M.II, Srivilliputhur, this Court restrained from quashing the FIR, by making an observation that the remedy open to the petitioners is to challenge the final report after the cogniz...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »