Chennai Orders Court November 2025 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.
M.G.Kannabiran Vs Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 28.11.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR and WMP.No.9560 & 9562 of 2019 M.G.Kannabiran .. petitioner vs Anna Salai, Chennai 2. RespondentsPrayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 08.11.2018 in memo No.25026/Pa.Pi.(Nir)4/MTC/2018 issued by the 2nd respondent, quash the same in so far as restricting the alternative employment given to the petitioner only for 3 months and asking the officials to give him driver work after expiry of 3 months and after getting fitness certificate from the Corporation's Medical Officer and consequently direct the respondents to provide him suitable alternative employment / light duty in commensurate with his health condition, with continuity of service, pay protection, back wages and with all other attendant/service benefits with effect from08...
Tamilarasan vs the Managing Director
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 28.11.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI in Tamilarasan Petitioner vs. The Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Pallavan House, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. ... Respondent Prayer in C.M.P.No.14367 of 2024.: This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Order IV Rule 9(4) of AS Rules to condone the delay of 257 days in filing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the Order dated 31.01.2023 and made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.6269 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Judge, Court of Small Causes, Prayer in C.M.A.SR.No.71506 of 2023 : This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against theOrder dated 31.01.2023 and made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.6269 of 2017 on thefile of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai. . R.KALAIMATHI, J., ssn For Petitioner : Ms.M.Malar For Respondent : Mr.M.Murali VinodhORDERHeard the ...
M.Palanisamy vs M.Parvathamani
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 28/11/2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL AND C.M.P.NO.8265 OF 2023 M.Palanisamy ... Petitioner/1st Respondent/ 1st Defendant Vs. 1.M.Parvathamani ... 1st Respondent/Petitioner/ Plaintiff 2.P.Senthilkumar 3.Nallasivam 4.Manoranjitham 5.Chinnammal ... Respondents 2 to 5/ Respondents 2 to 5 Defendants 2 to 5 (The Respondents 2 to 5 are remained exparte before the Trial Court, hence notice may be dispensed with for the Respondents 2 to 5) Page No.1 of 4 PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of theConstitution of India, 1950, praying to set aside the Fair and Final Orderdated February 01, 2023 made in I.A.No.03 of 2022 in O.S.No.99 of 2013 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Perundurai. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Ramaraj for Mr.M.Guruprasad For Respondent-1 : Mr.R.Nalliyappan For Respondents-2 to 5 : Ex parte by Order dated June 07, 2023 by Joint Registrar (AS)ORDERMr.C.Ramaraj appearing for Mr.M.Guruprasad, Couns...
R.Sivakumar Vs Rajesh Lakhoni, IAS.,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 28-11-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA R.Sivakumar S/o. Rajaram, No. 47, Car Street, Singirikudi post, Cuddalore Taluk. Petitioner(s) Vs1. Rajesh Lakhoni, I.A.S.,Contemnor(s) Contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempts of Court Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for gross disobedience of the orders of this Honble Court in W.P.No.32563 of 2023 dated 20.11.2023. For Petitioner(s): M/s. N.Suresh For Contemnor(s): Mr.G.Anandgopalan, for M/s.Agam LegalORDERThe contempt petition is filed for disobedience of the order of this Court dated 20.11.2023.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought time.3. The learned counsel for the contemnors on the other hand submitted thatthe order passed by this Court has been complied with. The learned counsel produced the copy of the order dated 06.01.2025, granting permanent status to the petitioner.4. In view of the order of the respondents dated 06.01.2025, this Court is oft...
The State of Tamilnadu vs D Ramajayam
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
C.M.P.No.8404 of 2025 in W.A.SR.No.50063 of 2025R.SURESH KUMAR, J.ANDK.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.(Order of the Court was made by R. SURESH KUMAR, J.) All the respondents were served and the name and address of the respondents have been shown in the cause list, none present before this Court.2. Since the delay is only 465 days, having satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, this petition is ordered and the delay is condoned.3. Registry is directed to number the appeal and place the same for admission, if the papers are otherwise in order. (R.S.K., J.) (K.G.T., J.) 28.11.2025 vji https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
National Insurance Co Ltd., Vs P.Sasikumar
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
C.M.P.No.14562 of 2025 in C.M.A.SR.No.49102 of 2025Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.andMUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR,J.[Order of the Court was made by Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.] The petition has been filed with a delay of 98 days in preferring the above appeal.2. Notice has been served onrespondents 1 to 4 and counsel has been engaged on their behalf. As far as the 5th respondent is concerned, the private notice has been returned with the endorsement as address not sufficient.3. From the records, we find evenbefore the Tribunal, the 5th respondent, who was arrayed as 1st respondent, did not contest the proceedings and was set exparte. In such circumstances and since there is no objection from the contesting respondents, the petition seeking condonation of delay of 98 days is allowed. [Dr.G.J., J.] & [M.S.K., J.] 28.11.2025 rpl Note: The Registry is directed to number theAppeal, if it is otherwise in order...
Raj @ Rajkumar vs State by the Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 28-11-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI AND CRL A NO. 488 OF 20231. Raj @ Rajkumar S/O.Devaraj, Door No. 10/13 Street,Gandhi Nagar,Guduvanchery,Kanchipuram District Petitioner(s) Vs1. State By The Inspector Of Police W-20,All Women Police Station, Saidapet,Chennai - 15 Crime No. Respondent(s)PRAYER To suspend the sentence imposed against the petitioner by the by the Learned Session Judge,Special Court for exclusive trial of cases under POCSO act ,Chennai 104 in SC No. 09/2021 dated 27.02.2023 and release the petitioner on bail till the disposal of the CA No. 484/2023 on the file of this Hon'ble court For Petitioner(s): M/s.R.Radha Pandian S.Nadhiya For Respondent: Mr.V. Meganathan, Govt AdvocateORDERThis petition has been filed to suspend the sentence imposed against the petitioner on 27.2.2023 in Spl.S.C.No.9 of 2021 on the file of the Learned Sessions Court, Special Court for Exclusive trial of POCSO Act, Chennai ...
Mittulaul Lalah and Sons vs the Deputy Director
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 28.11.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI Mittulaul Lalah & Sons No.6, Mullipuram road, Kaspapalayakottai, Kuttapalayam Post, Nathakadaiyur via, Tirupur District 638 108. ...Appellant vs. The Deputy Director, Coimbatore 641 045. ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 82(2) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, to set aside the order and decree of the Employees State Insurance Court, Coimbatore in EIOP No.34 of 2020 dated 14.02.2023. For Appellant : Mr.S.Haroon for Mr.T.S.Gopalan and Co. For Respondent : Mr.C.V.RamachandramoorthyJUDGMENTThe learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo stating that the respondent Employees State Insurance Corporation on 24.07.2025, has introduced an Amnesty Scheme for the purpose of one time settlement of all the disputes pending as on 31.03.2025.2. The learned counsel would also submit that the appellant is willing to avail the scheme for...
Suromani vs Mathiyalagan
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-28-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 28.11.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL and C.M.P.Nos.21218, 21219, 21220 & 21221 of 2022 Suromani Revision Petitioner -Vs- 1.Mathiyalagan 2.Selvamani 3.D.Maharaja 4.D.Robert 5.D.Lillypushpam 6.D.Latha 7.Rajamani 8.D.Vennila ...RespondentsPRAYER: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 115 of CPC, praying to set aside the fair and final orders dated 9th November 2021 passed in I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2019 in C.F.R.No.3275 of 2019 in unnumbered A.S. (now numbered A.S.No.22 of 2021 dated 23rd November 2021) on the file of the Sub Court, Bhavani, and pass such further orders. For Petitioners : No appearance For R1 & R4 : No appearanceCOMMON ORDERWhen the matter came up for hearing on 12.11.2025, this Court passed the following order:Ms.Shalini, representing Mr.A.Sivaji, learned Counsel on record for the Revision Petitioners submitted that the Counsel on record has reported No instructions from the Petitioners. To tha...
M.Rajendran Vs The Commissioner of Police
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Nov-27-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 27.11.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR and W.M.P.No.2372 of 2019 M.Rajendran ... Petitioner vs The Commissioner of Police, City Police Office, Salem City. RespondentPrayer: Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the respondent vide proceedings No.CPO.671/2013, C.No.H1/269/16979/2013 dated 12.07.2013 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to revoke the order of suspension dated 12.07.2013 and reinstate the petitioner in service with all attendant benefits and pass orders.For Petitioner : Mr.J.Melwin Jabaz for Mr.S.Vijayakumar For Respondent : Mrs.V.Yamunadevi Special Government PleaderORDERThe learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petitions does not survive for consideration and thus, the writ petition has become infructuous and seeks permission...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »