Chennai Court May 1994 Judgments
The State Vs. Mathivanan and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-24-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ2795
ORDER1. This petition is filed under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the order dated 17-5-1994 hearing Ref. No. A, FIR No. 307/94 in N. 1 Cr. No. 745 of 1994 on the file of the learned VII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras-1. The petition is filed by the State. It is averred in the petition as follows :- '1. The petitioner states that in respect of a murder which took place on 18-4-1994 a case in N. 1 Royapuram Police Station Crime No. 745/94 for offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 302 read with 109 I.P.C. had been registered and the investigation is in progress. 2. The investigation in the case conducted so for discloses the involvement of the 12 accused besides the respondents 1 to 4 in this petition. In the First Information Report lodged with the petitioner in respect of the abovesaid occurrence, the respondents 1 to 4 herein are alleged to have attacked the deceased with lethal weapons causing multiple injuries on the body of the deceased. Furt...
Tag this Judgment!Santhanalakshmi Vs. S. Murugesan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-17-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Mad244
ORDER1. This petition is filed under Sections 3, 7 to 10 and 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act.2. The petitioner is the mother of the minor boy Karthik alias Karthigeyan aged about 8 years. The petitioner married the respondent in the year 1981 and the minor boy Karlhik alias Karthigeyan was born to them on 2-1-1983. The petitioner has alleged hercunder. She the petitioner had been to her parents house in January 1986 and returned to her matrimonial house with certain new clothes and house-hold articles presented to her by her parents. But the respondent, who developed allergic to his in-laws, directed the petitioner to return all materials to her parents. This resulted in a quarrel between them and the respondent beat the petitioner, who had to return to her parents' house. The respondent a few days later, came to the petitioner's house and tried to take away the minor boy Karthik along with him but at the intervention of the neighbours, the child was retrieved to the petitioner. The ...
Tag this Judgment!N. Muthu Gounder Vs. Jagadeesh and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-10-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Mad112
ORDER1. The above writ petition was originally filed against respondents 1 to 3 and the same was disposed of by me on 23-12-1993 on the basis of the joint memo signed by the counsel on either side viz., Mr. C. R. Krishnamurthi for the petitioner and Mr. V. A. Sadagopan for the 1st respondent, by passing the following Order: 'The Petitioner in the above writ petition is one N. Muthu Gounder. The 1st respondent is one O. Jagadeesh. The above writ petition has been filed to quash the order in Appeal No. 85 of 1995 dated 28-10-1993 filed by the 1st respondent herein on the file of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Madras, the 3rd respondent herein. The dispute between the petitioner and the Respondents appears to be with regard to the timings of the petitioner's vehicle's departure. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the 1st respondent herein and to quash the said order, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition.'2. The writ petition was admitted by me on 10-11-1993 ...
Tag this Judgment!Malleswara Finance and Investments Company Private Limited Vs. the Com ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: May-10-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Mad341; [1994]81CompCas66(Mad)
ORDER1. The above writ petition has been filed for the following relief.To issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the 1st respondent culminating in its order dated 28-5-1993 in C.P. No. 29 of 1992 and quash the same.2. The case of the petitioner is as follows: By a resolution of the Board of Directors of the petitioner dated 5-6-1992, it was resolved that an inter-corporate deposit of Rupees 2,40,000/ - be made to the 18th respondent fora period of three years with interest at the rate of 15% per annum. The said deposit was to be secured by the pledge of 20,000 shares of the 3rd respondent. On 6-6-1992, a letter of pledge was executed by the 18th respondent in favour of the petitioner which inter alia entitled the petitioner to enjoy all legal right as a shareholder of the 3rd respondent, including exercise of voting rights and entitlement to all accretions of the said shares during the period of pledge.3. Pursuant to the said letter' of pledge, the petitioner, under cov...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›