Chennai Orders Court March 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.
SARATH Vs Brindha
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
CMP.No.7027 of 2026 in CMA.SR.No.164060 of 2025R.KALAIMATHI, J.Heard.2. This Civil Miscellaneous Petition, which is filed to condone the delay of 166 days in filing the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, is ordered. 26.03.2026 Mac https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
kumaran G Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-03-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 5166 of 2026 G.Kumaran S/o Gangatharan, SA, Patel Street, Bhuvaneshwaripetrai, Gudiyatham Taluk, ...Petitioner/Accused Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Bagayam Police Station, In Crime No.24 /2026 ...Respondent/ Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.24 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent, Bagayam Police Station, Vellore District. For Petitioner : Mr.Rajasekar M For Respondent: Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Page1 of 5ORDERThe petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 5, 7(3) of the Lotteries Regulation Act, 1998 and 318(4) of BNS in Crime No.24 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.2. The case of the prosecutio...
G.Kumaran Vs State represented by The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-03-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 5165 of 20261. G.Kumaran S/o.Gangatharan, 5A, Patel Street, Bhuvaneshwaripetrai, Gudiyatham Taluk,2. Gopal @ Gopalakrishnan, S/o. Vishwanathan, 81st street, NSK Nager, Neloorpet, Gudiyatham Taluk, Vellore District 632602. ...Petitioners/Accused Vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, Bagayam Police Station, Crime No.23/2026. ...Respondent/ ComplainantPrayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Cr.No.23/2026 on the file of the respondent, Bagayam Police Station, Vellore District. Page1 of 5 For Petitioners : Mr.Rajasekar M For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)ORDERThe petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 5, 7(3) of the Lotteries Regulation Act, 1998 and 318...
ELUMALAI Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-03-2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR IN CRL OP NO. 5137 OF 20261. Elumalai2. Sooran@ Soorappadaiatchi Petitioner(s) Vs1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by (Crime No.85 of 2025)2. Pazhaniammal Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr. S.Sarath Chandran For Respondent(s): Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Addl. Public Prosecutor For R1ORDERThis petition is ordered. 26-03-2026 nvM. NIRMAL KUMAR,J.nv To 1.The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by (Crime No.85 of 2025).2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Crl.M.P. No. 3871 of in Crl.O.P. No. 5137 of...
Neelaveni Vs Canara Bank
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
CMP.No.7339 of 2026 in CMSA.SR.No.83450 of 2025R.KALAIMATHI, J.This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to condone the delay of 259 days in paying the deficit court fee in the above Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.3. Accepting the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, this petition is ordered and the delay of 259 days in paying the deficit court fee is hereby condoned. 26.03.2026 Mac https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
Kader Mohideen Vs Mr. S.Ravichandran,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-03-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA Kader Mohideen S/o. Mohamed Ibrahim, No. 10, Kathar Bhai Street, Nandhavana Mettur, Kamaraj Nagar, Thiruvallur -600 071. ..Petitioner(s) Vs ..Respondent(s) Contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, pleased to initiate contempt proceedings and punish the respondent in accordance with law for wilful and deliberate of the order dated 11.07.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No. 25194 of 2025. For Petitioner(s): Mr. A.M.D.Mohamed Salih Hussain For Respondent(s): Mr.T.ChandrasekaranORDERThe learned counsel for the respondent has produced an order copy of the proceedings in Moo.Mu.No.1729/2025/A6 dated Nil.03.2026 and submitted that the order passed by this Court in W.P.No. 25194 of 2025 dated 11.07.2025 has been complied with. Page1 of 42. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the aforesaidorder has not been received by the pet...
K.Murugan vs the District Collector
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-03-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY WP No.7303 of 2024 and WMP Nos. 8165 & 8167 of 2024 K.Murugan ..Petitioner(s) Vs1. The District Collector, O/o.The District Collector, Villupuram,2. The District Revenue Officer, O/o.The District Revenue Officer, Villupuram Town And Taluk,3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.The Revenue Divisional Officer,4. The Revenue Tahsildhar, O/o.The Revenue Tahsildhar,5. The Head Surveyor, O/o.The Head Surveyor Office, Taluk Office Of Tindivanam,6. The Revenue Inspector, O/o.The Revenue Isnpector, Kolliyankunam Revenue Village, Mailam Post, Tindivanam Taluk, Page1 of 67. The Village Administrative Officer, O/o.The Village Administrative, No.13, Kolliyankunam Revenue Village, Mailam Post, Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District-604 304. ..Respondent(s)Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus c...
S.Kathiresan Vs The Chairman
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26-03-2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY S.Kathiresan No.2 /161, Muttanchetty Road, Devarayapuram, Senthamangalam Taluk, Namakkal District. Petitioner(s) Vs1. The ChairmanCorporation (TANGEDCO), No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002. 4.Assistant Executive Engineer (O and M) Erumapatti Electricity Distribution Circle, Corporation (TANGEDCO), Erumapatti , 5.Thiru.S.Veerakumar No.2/ 240, Muttanchetty Road, Devarayapuram, Senthamangalam Taluk, Respondent(s)PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to provide electricity service connection to the Petitioners borewell situated in S.No. 49 / 5B Devarayapuram Village, Senthamangalam Taluk, Namakkal District in view of the Sanction issued by the 3rd Respondent in L.No.Se. Po / E and Pa / Na / Varai / Ko.Vi. Va. Tatkal / No.41 / 20 dated .09.2021.For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Elangovan For Res...
Chennai Port Trust Vs Indian Bank
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 26.03.2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN in W.A.No.SR 32018 of 2025 Chennai Port Trust (Now known as Chennai Port Authority) Rep by its Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer Chennai Port Trust, Rajaji Salai Chennai - 600001 Appellant(s) Vs Indian Bank Rep by its Managing Director and CEO Corporate Office 254-260, Avvai Shanmugam Salai Royapettah, Chennai - 600 001 and 6 others Respondent(s) For Appellant(s): Ms. Harshini Jothiraman For Respondent(s): Mr. T.Sundar Rajan for R1 to R5 Mr. K.Srinivasan Sr. Advocate & Spl. Public Prosecutor for R6 Mr. C.Mohan And Ms. A.Rexy Josephine Mary For M/s. King And Partridge for R7ORDER(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard on the application seeking condonation of delay of 89 days in filing the appeal.2. For the reasons stated in the affidavit, delay is condoned.3. Application is...
R.Muthusamy Vs Integrated Finance Co. Ltd
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Mar-26-2026
C.R.P.No.1019 of 2026 At the instance of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, this matter is listed today under the caption "for being mentioned".2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that by inadvertence, a direction to the Registry to return the original papers was not incorporated in the order dated 26.03.2026 passed in C.R.P.No.1019 of 2026.3. Accepting the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the following line is added at the end of paragraph no.4 of the order dated 26.03.2026 passed in C.R.P.No.1019 of 2026: "4. The Trial Court has merely returned the application filed by the petitioners, which is a ministerial act and no judicialorder is passed and therefore the petitioners cannot be aggrievedby the ministerial act of merely returning the papers for compliance. Hence, this Court finds no merit in this civil revision petition. However, the petitioners are granted liberty to re- prese...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »