Chennai Orders Court February 2026 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.Sadiq Ali Vs The Pension Payment Officer
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-27-2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.02.2026CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and WMP(MD)No.4379 of 2026 A.Sadiq Ali ...Petitioner Vs 1.The Pension Payment Officer, Nandam, Chennai 600 035. Pension Pay Office, Nandanam, Chennai 35. Chennai. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 and 2 to disburse the revised pending domestic and medical allowance to petitioners deceased mother bank account bearing A/c.No.0038101000044046 based on the petitioners representation dated 30.10.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.SMA.Jinnah For Respondent : Mr.G.V.Vairsam Santhosh, Nos.1 and 2 Additional Government Pleader For Respondent : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar No.3ORDERThe petitioner seeking revised medical allowance has submitted a representation and has filed this writ petition. 2.When this writ petition is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader b...
Balasubramani Vs Muthupillai
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-27-2026
C.M.P.(MD) Nos.20492 to 20494 of 2025 in S.A.(MD)No.172 of 2014K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.The above petitions have been filed (i) to condone the delay of 1232 days in filing the petition for setting aside the abatement caused due to the death of the second appellant (ii) to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the second appellant and (iii) to bring on record the petitioners 3 to 5 as legal heirs of the deceased second appellant and rank them as appellants 3 to 5 in the above appeal.2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that they are not having any objections to allow these petitions.4. Considering the reasons assigned andtaking note of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, these petitions are ordered and the Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments in the main papers and post the same on 24.03....
M.G. Gomathy Vs T. Udhayachandran IAS
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-27-2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.02.2026CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN in M.G.Gomathy ... Petitioner Vs. 1.T.Udhayachandran, The Secretary to Government, 2.Simranjeethsingh Kahlom, The District Collector, 3.Shankara Narayanan, The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to initiate contempt proceedings against thecontemnors / respondents herein for willful disobedience of the orderpassed in W.P.(MD)No.13775 of 2022, dated 13.10.2022 and punish them. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Porkodi For Respondents : Mr.S.S.Madhavan Additional Government PleaderORDERThe order passed by this Court has been complied with. The contempt petition is closed. Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No rmi To 1.The Secretary to Government, 2.The District Collector, 3.The District Revenue Officer,G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.rmi in...
N.Suseela Vs C.Meenakshi
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-27-2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.02.2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI in N.Suseela ... Petitioner Vs. C.Meenakshi, Additional Assistant, Tirunelveli District. ... Contemnor Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for committing contempt of Court by violating the direction given by this Court on 28.11.2013 passed in W.A. (MD)No.204 of 2020. For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Venkatesan For Respondent : Mr.T.Amjadkhan Government AdvocateORDER(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble G.R.Swaminathan J.) The order passed by this Court has been complied with. The contempt petition is closed. [G.R.S., J.] [R.K.M., J.] Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No rmi To The Additional Assistant, Tirunelveli District. G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J andR.KALAIMATHI, J.rmi in...
PRADEEP Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-02-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN in Vs Vs To amend as Learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Madukkarai instead of Learned Judicial Magistrate Court -IV, Coimbatore in all the places in Crl.R.C.No.2777 of 2025 order dated 16.12.2025. To set aside the order in Crl.M.P.No.844 of 2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Court IV, Coimbatore dated 25.11.2025. Page1 of 4 For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.N.Balakrishnan For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate(Criminal Side)OrderThis Petition has been filed to amend and replace 'learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Madukkarai' instead of 'Learned Judicial Magistrate Court-IV, Coimbatore' in all the places in the order of this Court dated 16.12.2025 in Crl.R.C.No.2777 of 2025. 2.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 3.Being satisfied with the reasons stated in ...
Mrs. Kalaiyarasi .E vs Dr.a.Sasidhar
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-26-2026
W.M.P.No.344 of 2026 in W.P.No.47479 of 2025M.DHANDAPANI, J.This Petition has been filed to implead the petitioner/proposed 2nd respondent as 2nd respondent in the writ petition.2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.3. Being satisfied with the reasonsstated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, this petition is ordered. 26.02.2026 ssb Note: Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendment in the cause title. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
Kaliyamoorthy vs the State Rep.by the Deputy Superintendent of Police
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 26.02.2026Coram:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN Kaliyamoorthy ... Petitioner Vs. State represented by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tindivanam Sub-Divison, Mailam Police Station ...Respondent Cr.No.217 of 2017 Prayer: This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking suspension of dated 30.09.2024 and release the petitioner on bail, pending criminal appeal. For Petitioner : M/s.V.Gayathri For Respondent : Mr.A.Damodaran, Addl. Public Prosecutor *******ORDER(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN, J.) This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking suspension of dated 30.09.2024 and enlarge the petitioner on bail, pending appeal. 2 It is seen that even though charges framed under the provisions of SC/ST (PoA) Act, the learned trial Judge not found the accused guilty for the offence under the provisions of SC/ST (PoA) Act and neither the State nor the Def...
V.Dhanuskodi Ambalam, vs 1. T.N. Land Reforms
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-26-2026
2026:MHC:822IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-02-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN V.Dhanuskodi Ambalam, S/o. Vellayan Ambalam, Main Bazaar Street, Pallavarayanpattim Post, Pannaipuram Via, Uthamapalayam Taluk, Madurai District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs1. The Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Special Appellate Tribunal, Chennai2. The Commissioner and Director of Land Reforms, Chennai 600 005.3. The Assistant Commissioner, (Land Reforms), Madurai. ..Respondent(s)PETITION filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the proceedings dated 27.04.2000 made in Special Revision Petition No.23 of 1999 passed by the first respondent and quash the same. Page1 of 4 For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Elansezhiyan For Mr.G.Ethirajulu For Respondent(s): R1 Tribunal Mr.R.Ramanlaal, AAG assisted by Mr.T.Arun Kumar, AGP For R2 & R3.ORDER(Order of the Cour...
PREMNATH Vs Mariya Pradeep
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-02-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Premnath S/O. Ekanathan, Residing At Flat No110, Lemongraz Apartment, Kallikuppam Ambattur Chennai 600 053 President of Lemongraz Apartment Owner Association ..Petitioner Vs1. Mariya Pradeep2. Muthukumaran3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police4. The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Inspector of Police, Chennai - 600 053. ..Respondent(s)PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to allow this Criminal Original Petition and issue an appropriate direction to the Station House Officer, T1 Police Station, Ambattur to comply with the order dated 30th January 2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur in Crl.M.P. No. 3483 of 2023 by registering an FIR and conducting an investigation into the petitioner's complaint. For Petitioner : Mr.C.SugumarFor Respondents : Mr.J.Kamaraj for R1 & R2 Mr.S.Santh...
R.Suresh Kumar vs the State of Tamilnadu
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Feb-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26.02.2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY and W.M.P. Nos.5728 and 5729 of 2025 R.Suresh Kumar .. Petitioner vs 1 The State of Tamil Nadu Rep By Secretary to the Government Erode District 638 052. .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to callfor the records of the first respondent vide impugned G.O.Ms.No.39 dated 27.09.2023 issued under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land Industrial Purposes Act 1997 (Tamil Nadu Act 10 of 1999) issued by the 1st respondent and to quash the same in so far as the lands of the petitioner comprised in Survey No.226/1 measuring an extent 0.04.0 Hec and Survey No.226/2B measuring an extent 3.00.0 Hec situated at Ingur Village, Perundural Taluk. Erode District.For Petitioner : Mr.V.Kadhirvelu For Respondents : Mr.Abishek Murthy, Government Advocate for R1 to R3, R5 and R6 Mr....
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »