Chennai Court February 2012 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.
V.Krishnaveni Vs. V.Rajkumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C praying to call for the records and set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai, in Cr.M.P.No.120 of 2010, dated 15.06.2010, confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court No.1), Madurai in C.A.No.57 of 2010 dated 07.03.2011 and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to reside in the shared household situated at No.6, Nagalingampillai Street, Thiruchuli Road, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.ORDER1. There is no representation for the petitioner. It is not the first time the revision petitioner has left the matter without representation. As such, this court deems it appropriate to pass an order after going through the records and after hearing the submissions made on behalf of the respondent.2.The revision petitioner (V.Krishnaveni) is the mother of Rajkumar, the first respondent herein. A.Gopalakrishnan, the 2nd respondent is the father- in-l...
D.Vijayakumari Vs. State of Tamilnadu, Rep.by Home
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the entire records related to the petitioner's husband's detention under Tamilnadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order dated 16.9.2011 on the file of the second respondent herein made in proceeding No.303/BDFGISSV/2001, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the detenu K.Dhanasekaran, S/O Mr.Karuppathevar, before this Hon'ble Court and set the detenu at liberty, who is now detained in Central Prison, Vellore.O R D E RK.MOHAN RAM, J :1. The petitioner in the above petition is the wife of the detenu. The detenu came to the adverse notice of the Police Authorities in the following cases :S.No.Police StationCr.No.Section of LawR8 Vadapalani P.S.25 of 2010147, 148, 448, 427, 506(ii) IPC r/w 3 of Tamilnadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) ActR10 MGR Nagar P.S.880 of 2011447, 294(b), 323, 427, 506(ii) IPCR10 MGR Nagar P.S....
M.Vigneshvaran Vs. the Chairman
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating Memorandum No.7742/OTD-C3/96 dated 08.08.2001 passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the result and consequently quash the selection to appointment to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests 1996-1997 and 1997-1998 and direct the 1st respondent to keep one post of Assistant Conservator of Forest to be posted during 1996-1997 and 1997-1998 vacant.O R D E R1. The petitioner has a degree of M.Sc., in Botany from Madurai Kamaraj University and belongs to Scheduled Caste. In pursuance to the advertisement issued in the Indian Express, the petitioner applied for one of the posts of Assistant Conservator of Forest, which were to be filled up through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. Total 8 vacancies were advertised, out of which, two vacancies were reserved for members belonging to Scheduled Caste, i.e. one for 1996-199...
Rattika [G.M.R.] Textiles, Rep. by Its Partner G.i. Viswanathan Vs. Ne ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
(This complaint dt. 26.07.2005 filed against the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service, claiming Rs.32,19,167/- together with interest at 18% per annum from 14.07.2002 till payment in full, to pay Rs.5 lakhs as compensation for mental agony and suffering undergone by the complainants partner and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards costs. This petition coming on before us for hearing finally on 15.02.2011, upon perusing the material documents, and upon hearing the counsels for both the parties, and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Commission made the following order.) M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT 1. Invoking the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, this complaint is filed for the recovery of a sum of Rs.32,19,167/- with interest along with compensation of Rs.5 lakhs, with costs on the following grounds [in brief]. 2. The complainant was carrying on business, as manufacturer and exporter of Hosiery Garments in Door No.42-C, Sidco Industrial Estate, Harvey Road,...
A.Subramanian Vs. the Secretary to Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
PrayerWrit petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein to regularise the service of the petitioner as Tractor Driver in the third respondent Town Panchayat from 17.01.1998 being the date of sanction of the post as per G.O.Ms.No.23 MA & WS Department dated 03.03.1998 with all attendant benefits.ORDER1. By consent of both sides, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. Heard Mr.V.Venkattasamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.D.Muruganantham, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.S.Chandrasekar, learned counsel for the third respondent.2. Seeking for a mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to regularise the service of the petitioner as Tractor Driver in the third respondent town panchayat from 17.01.1998 being the date of sanction of the post as per G.O.Ms.No.23 MA & WS Department dated 03.03.1998 with all attendant benefits,...
P.Nirmala Vs. K.Muruguselvam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 282 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 r/w. Section 19 of the Family Court Act against the Fair and Decretal Order dated 12.05.2008 made in F.C.O.P.No.1835 of 2002 on the file of the II Additional Family Court, Chennai.JUDGMENTM.VENUGOPAL,J.1. The Appellant/Respondent (Wife) has filed the instant Civil Miscellaneous Appeal as against the order dated 12.05.2008 in F.C.O.P.No.1835 of 2002 passed by the Learned II Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai.2.Before the Learned II Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai, during the trial of main F.C.O.P.No.1835 of 2002, on behalf of the Respondent/Petitioner (Husband), witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2 have been examined (though in the list of witnesses in the Order, it is inadvertently mentioned as P.W.1 to P.W.4) and Exs.P.1 and P.2 have been marked. On the side of the Appellant/Respondent (Wife), no witness has been examined for oral evidence, but Ex.R.1 has been marked for documentary evidence.3.The Learned II Additi...
Vaastupal JaIn Vs. Steel Authority of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of certiorari, calling for the records in E-auction SR No.1204 dated 06.07.2011, on the file of the respondent and quash the email dated 14.07.2011 as illegal and against the provisions of law.O R D E R1. M/s. Evershine Exports, a proprietary concern through its attorney prays for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari, to quash the order dated 14.07.2011, cancelling the offer of the petitioner to purchase as is where basis commercial quality stainless steel materials.2. The auction was fixed as 06.07.2011. The petitioner applied to participate in auction by depositing Earnest money of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) as per general terms and conditions of auction, along with letter of intent before the stipulated date. Letter of Intent filed by the petitioner was signed on behalf of the proprietary concern, by its general power of attorney holder.3. The respondent instead of rejecting...
K.Subbaiyah Vs. the Commissioner and Director of Fisheries.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to include petitioner's name in the panel for the Post of Fishery Overseer Grade II issued in Na.Ka.No.7359/Aa1/2011 dated 05.09.2011.O R D E R1. The petitioner joined the Fisheries Department as Office Assistant, and his services were regularised on 05.10.1978. The petitioner is continuing on the same post. The seniority number of the petitioner in the cadre of Office Assistant is 36, and the next channel of promotion for the Office Assistant, is to the post of Fisheries Overseer Grade II.2. The petitioner therefore filed number of representations requesting the respondents to promote him to the post of Fisheries Overseer Grade II, but the representations filed by the petitioner was rejected on the ground that the post of Fisheries Overseer Grade II did not fall in the cadre of the petitioner, as the post of Office Assistant was not a feeder cadre, therefor...
A.K. Balaji Vs. Australia
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 8 to take appropriate action against the respondents 9 40 or any other Foreign Law Firms or foreign lawyers, who are illegally practising the profession of Law in India and forbearing them from having any legal practice either on the litigation side or in the field of non-litigation and commercial transactions in any manner within the territory of India, and pass such further or other orders.O R D E R1. The Hon ble the Chief JusticeThis writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 8 to take appropriate action against respondents 9 to 40 or any other Foreign Law Firm or Foreign Lawyers, who are illegally practising the Profession of Law in India, and for a further direction to forbear them from having any legal practice either on the litigation side...
Tamil Nadu Cooperative Marketing Vs. M.Krishnasamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the order passed by the 3rd respondent in C.A.No.22/2004 dated 04.04.2007 and quash the same.O R D E R1. The challenge in this writ petition is to the order passed by the third respondent, namely, Special Tribunal for Cooperative Society Cases, Chennai dated 04.04.2007 made in C.A.No.22/2004, with a prayer to quash the same.2. The case of the petitioner is that the first respondent herein was employed as Special Officer in Tamil Nadu Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited [hereinafter referred to as 'TANFED'] between 07.08.1992 and 30.09.1994. During his tenure, the first respondent alleged to have caused loss to the TANFED along with other Special Officers and as a result, an enquiry was conducted under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 [hereinafter referred to as 'Act']. Based on the findings of the Enquiry Officer's report, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »