Chennai Orders Court September 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.
P. Gnanasekar vs the Secretary to Government (Hri)
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
C.M.P.No.7215 of 2025 in W.A.SR.No.2061 of 2024R.SURESH KUMAR, J.ANDHEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.(Order of the Court was made by R. SURESH KUMAR, J.) This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed to condone the delay of 78 days in filing the above writ appeal.2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.3. Despite notice having been served and the name and the address of the respondents have been printed in the cause list, no one is appearing for the respondents.4. Having satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, this petition is ordered and the delay is condoned.5. Registry is directed to number the appeal and place the same for admission, if the papers are otherwise in order. (R.S.K., J.) (H.C., J.) 25.09.2025 vji https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
S.Chandra vs Atbs.Santhakumar
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
C.M.P.No.17049 of 2025 in A.S. No. 378 of 2020DR. A.D. MARIA CLETE, J This petition has been filed to implead the 8th respondent/proposed 8th respondent as 8th respondent in A.S.No.378 of 2020. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents who submits that he has got no serious objection in allowing this petition. 3.Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, this petition is allowed. Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments in the cause title.25.09.2025 mp https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
Devarajan vs Stae Rep by
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 25-09-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR CRL OP No. 8516 of 2024 & Crl.M.P.No.6209 of 20241. Devarajan 2.D.Venkatesan 3.M.Manivasagam 4.P. Kandasamy Petitioner(s) Vs1. State Rep BySub Inspector Of Police, Ammapet 2.Chandrasekaran Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for entire records in connection with C.C.No.726 OF 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.5, Salem and quash the same in so far as the petitioners are concerned. For Petitioner(s): Ms.M.Pbharathi For Respondent(s): Mr.Vinothraja For R1 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen for R2ORDERWhen the petition is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present petition and has also made an endorsement to that effect.2. In view of the submission and the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petit...
P.Dhinakaran Vs The District Collector,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 25-09-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ1. P.Dhinakaran Appellant(s) Vs1. The District Collector,2.The District Revenue Officer, 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruppatur Taluk, Thirupathur, Thiurpathur District,. Respondent(s) PRAYER To set aside the order dated 19.02.2025 in WP.No.2363 of 2021. For Appellant(s): Mr.S.Arokia Mani Raj For Respondent(s): Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan Additional Government PleaderORDER(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present intra-court appeal has been instituted challenging the writorder dated 19.02.2025 in WP.No.2363 of 2021.2. It is not in dispute that the subject property described in the writproceedings measuring to an extent of 6.66 acres was conditionally assigned in favour of one Mr.Sendrayan, who is the great grandfather of the appellant/writ petitioner. Subsequently, one Mr.Chinnapaiyan purchased the property and...
The Christukula Ashram, Vs The Inspector General of Registration,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
inS. M. SUBRAMANIAM, J., MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J., The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that a resolution was passed for the purpose of merging the petitioner's rd society with the 3 respondent/National Machinery Society of India and the said resolution was cancelled on the very next day. Since they are necessary parties, seeks to implead them in the writ appeal as second respondent.rd2. The learned counsel appearing for the 3 respondent would oppose by stating that the petitioner's trust has been represented by the trustee, who was an employee, terminated from the third respondent society.3. The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 have no serious objection for impleading the petitioner in the writ appeal.4. All these grounds on merits are to be adjudicated in the mainAppeal. However, no prejudice would be caused by impleading the petitioner for an effective adjudication of the present intra-court appeal. Since the appe...
M.Yuvaraj vs Preethi Prabha
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
CMP.No.8218 of 2025 in CRP.SR.No.47512 of 2025M. JOTHIRAMAN, J.This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to condone the delay of 69 days in filing the present Civil Revision Petition preferred against the impugned order dated 23.09.2024 passed by the learned VII Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in O.P.No.2300 of 2022.2. Heard both sides. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has serious objection for allowing this petition.3. Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, the delay is condoned and this petition is ordered accordingly.25.09.2025 av Note: Registry is directed to number the Civil Revision Petition, if it is otherwise in order and post the same for admission in the usual course. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
A.Shanumugam vs R.Thangaraju
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
C.M.P.No.9425 of 2022in A.S. No. 466 of 2020 DR. A.D. MARIA CLETE, J This petition has been filed for extension of six weeks time to deposit the 25% of the suit claim to the credit of the suit as imposed in the order dated 01.06.2020 made in CMP.No.5764 of 2020 in AS.No.466 of 2020. 2.It is seen from the records that the service has been completed in the appeal. Since the main appeal is ripe for final hearing, this petition is closed.25.09.2025 (2/3) gv/nvi https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
Mallika Vs Rajendran
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
C.M.P.No.21692 of 2025 in C.M.A.SR.No.60561 of 2019 R.KALAIMATHI, J., This petition has been filed to accept the cause title shown in the appeal and permit the petitioners to prosecute the above.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.3. Being satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, this civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. 25.09.2025 kmm https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
K. Annapoorani vs P. Devaraj
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 25-09-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMANK.Annapoorani ... Petitioner vs P.Devaraj ... Respondent Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records relating to the eviction proceedings in R.L.T.O.P. No.01 of 2021 on the file of the learned Rent Controller/Principal District Munsif Court, Erode and strike off the same by allowing this Civil Revision Petition by exercising the power conferred. For Petitioner: Mr.R.T.Vishnu For Respondent: Mr.J.Titus EnockORDERThe present Civil Revision Petition has been filed for striking of the eviction proceedings in R.L.T.O.P. No.01 of 2021 on the file of the learned Rent Controller/Principal District Munsif Court, Erode. 2.According to the revision petitioner, the respondent/Devaraj hadfiled a petition in R.L.T.O.P. No.1 of 2021 on the file of the Rent Controller/Principal District Munsif Court, Erode against the revision petitioner/...
Marie Christiane Joseph vs Immaculate Heart of Mary Society
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Sep-25-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 25.09.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE C.M.P.No.8358 of 2020 in 1.Marie Christiane Joseph 2.Christopher Pushpadass Gerald Rayar ... PetitionersVersus1.Immaculate Heart of Mary Society, Rep.by its Vice President, Having office at Sacred Heart Middle School, Pudupalayam, Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu.2. Sister John Britto Mary3.Xavier Selvam 4.Rita Marie 5.Philomene Marie ... Respondents Prayer:- Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Order 39 Rule 1&2 of C.P.C., praying to grant ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents their men agents or anyone claiming under them from putting up any construction in the property morefully mentioned in the schedule hereunder being the subject matter of the suit in OS.No.4 of 2012 on the file of the Principal District Court, Puducherry pending disposal of the above AS.For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sathiyamoorthy For R1 to R5 : M/s.H.Mary Sowmi Rexi **********ORDERThis petition has been fil...