Chennai Madurai Court September 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.
Rameshchandran and Another Vs. The State Rep. by The Inspector of Poli ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C to call for the records pertaining to the Judgment made in S.C.No.59 of 2015, dated 30.11.2015 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli and set aside the same by allowing this appeal.) M.V. Muralidaran, J. 1. The appellants are the accused 1 and 2 in S.C.No.59/2015 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Thiruchirappalli Division, Thiruchirappalli. The trial court framed charges under Section 302 of I.P.C against this Appellants/Accused 1 and 2. 2. The Trial Court by Judgment dated 30.09.2015 convicted the appellants under Section 302 of I.P.C to undergo Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. The set off was allowed under section 428 of Cr.P.C. Challenging the said conviction and sentence passed against him, the present appeal has been filed by the appellants/accused 1 and 2. 3. The case of the prosecution ...
Pattan @ Pattu and Others Vs. State Represented by The Inspector of Po ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are the accused 1 to 3 in S.C.No.304/2015 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tuticorin. There was yet another co-accused arrayed as accused No.4 by name, Kandhaiah. The trial Court had framed as many as 6 charges against the accused as detailed below: ChrageAccusedPenal Provisions1A1 to A4120(B) r/w 302 IPC2A1 to A3341 IPC3A4302 r/w 109 IPC4A1 to A3302 r/w 34 IPC5A1294(b) IPC6A1 to A3506(ii) IPC 2. By judgment dated 02.03.2016, the trial Court has acquitted the 4th accused from all the charges. However, convicted and sentenced these appellants 1 to 3 alone as detailed below: AccusedConviction under SectionsSentence imposedA1341 IPCone month simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one week. 506(ii) IPCSix months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month 302 r/w 34 IPCImprisonment for life and fine of Rs....
K.M. Karupannan Vs. R. Saravanan
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to allow this Second Appeal setting aside the judgment and decree dated 05.06.2013 made in A.S.No.192 of 2011 on the file of Principal District Court, Trichy confirming the judgment and decree dated 06.06.2011 made in O.S.No.7 of 2007 on the file of Principal Subordinate Court, Trichy.) 1. The unsuccessful plaintiff before the Courts below is the appellant in this Second Appeal. 2. The plaintiff / appellant has filed a suit in O.S.No.7 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 04.02.1999 and for consequential relief in respect of the suit property. 3. The case of the plaintiff / appellant is that he entered into an agreement of sale on 04.02.1999 with the defendant / respondent in respect of the suit property for a total consideration of Rs.1,10,000/-. It was the further case of the plaintiff / appellant that on the date of agreeme...
Ranjit and Another Vs. Indira
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to set aside the judgement and decree in I.A.No.24 of 2015 in O.S.No.157 of 2012, dated 23.4.2015 on the file of the learned I Additional District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.) 1. The learned counsel for the Petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Civil Revision Petition and has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs....
Rengasamy Vs. Syed Mustafa
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision petition is filed under Section 115 of C.P.C., to set aside the order dated 13.04.2016 passed in I.A.No.880 of 2014 in O.S.No.220 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Trichirappalli.) 1. The civil revision petition is filed against the order dated 13.04.2016 passed in I.A.No.880 of 2014 in O.S.No.220 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Trichirappalli. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent has filed the suit in O.S.No.220 of 2007 before the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Trichy for specific performance and in the said suit, the petitioner was set exparte and exparte decree was passed on 25.10.2010. To set aside the said exparte decree, the petitioner filed application along with section 5 application in I.A.No.880 of 2014, to condone the delay of 1453 days in filing the application to set aside the exparte decree. 3. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was suffering from small v...
Sivakumar Vs. The State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Adiramapattin ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C to set aside the order of acquittal passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur at Pattukottai made in S.C.No.4 of 2013 dated 15.07.2015 and allow the above criminal appeal.) M.V. Muralidaran, J. 1. The appellant is the defacto-complainant in S.C.No.4 of 2013 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur. The trial court framed charges under Sections 147, 148, 324 r/w 149, 326 r/w 149 and 302 r/w 149 of I.P.C against this respondents 2 to 9/Accused 1, 2, 4, 6 to 10 in S.C.No.4 of 2013. 2. The instant appeal is arising out of the judgment of acquittal passed in S.C.No.4/13 on the file of the IIIrd Additional Session Judge, Pattukottai, Tanjavur District on 15.07.2015. In the said case, 10 persons were shown as accused, among them the case as against the 3rd accused namely Balaji was splitted in S.C.No.25/14 on the file of the same court. Further the accused No.5 ...
Kamaraj Vs. State Rep by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karur Distri ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Judgment and conviction dated 10.03.2014 made in S.C.No.18 of 2012 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Karur. S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the second accused in S.C.No.18 of 2011, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Karur. The Trial Court framed as many as eight charges against all the three accused, as detailed below. ChargeAccusedPenal Provisions11 to 3449 IPC21302 IPC32 and 3302 r/w 34 IPC41302 IPC52 and 3302 r/w 34 IPC61302 IPC72302 r/w 34 IPC81 to 3394 r/w 397 The first accused was one Mr.V.Santhanam @ Manojkumar. During the pendency of trial, the first accused died and thus, the charges against him stood abated. 2.By Judgment dated 10.03.2014, the Trial Court has convicted the accused Nos.2 and 3 under all the charges and accordingly punished them, as detailed below. AccusedSection of LawSentenceFine amount2 and 3449 IPCTo undergo imprisonment for lif...
P. Jaisanker Vs. The Executive Officer, Udangudi Town Panchayat, Tutic ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the Respondent in Na.Ka.No.281/15 dated 04.08.2016 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service as Sanitary Worker with all consequential and other attendant benefits.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to quash the impugned order dated 04.08.2016 passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.No.281/15, by which, the petitioner was suspended from service as per Rule 5(b) of Town Panchayat Employees (DandA) Rules, 1988. The petitioner also sought direction to the respondent to reinstate him into service as sanitary worker with all consequential and other attendant benefits. 2. Heard the learned counsel on either side. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to Backward Community and is a graduate in B.Sc. (Physics); that he is suf...
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Secretary, Chennai and Oth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the common order dated 17.04.2014, made in W.P.(MD)Nos. 8872 and 8873 of 2012.) Common Judgment V.M. Velumani, J. 1. These Writ Appeals have been filed challenging the common order of the learned Single Judge, dated 17.04.2014, made in W.P. (MD)Nos.8872 and 8873 of 2012. 2. Since common issues are involved in these writ appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common Judgment. 3. The facts of the case:- (i) According to the respondents, the first appellant sanctioned various posts to five newly established Medical Colleges all over Tamil Nadu, i.e., Tirunelveli, Tuticorin, Vellore, Kanyakumari and the third appellant College. The respondents were appointed as Sweepers on consolidated pay in the third appellant College, by the proceedings of the Dean of the College, in Na.Ka.No.5972-Ni.Pi 2/05, dated 28.02.2006 and the respondents joined service in the third appellant College on 13.09.2006. (ii) The ap...
K. Ravi Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Secretary to Governmen ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-27-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner for the post of Plot-watcher in the light of the order passed in W.P(MD)No. 4351 of 2010 dated 30.04.2013 with all monetary benefits.) 1. The petitioner seeks for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to regularize his service for the post of Plot-watcher in the light of the order passed in W.P(MD)No.4351 of 2010, dated 30.04.2013 with all monetary benefits. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. It is seen that the third respondent sent the proposal on 10.06.2015 to the second respondent to regularize the service of the petitioner along with others, in which, the serial No.24, the petitioner's name is find place. The said proposal is pending for more than 1-1/2 years. Therefore, the second responde...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »