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.
The Special Tahsildar(La) Vs. Deviramma and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2012
JUDGMENT1. Animadverting upon the judgement and decree passed by the Subordinate Judge, Hosur, dated 26.4.2010 in LAOP No.63 of 1997, the Government has filed this appeal.2. Heard the learned Special Government Pleader (AS) appearing for the appellant.3. Despite notice having been served on the respondents and their names also found printed in the cause list, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents. Hence, I would like to dispose of the matter on merits.4. A recounting and r'esume of facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this appeal would run thus:The Government vide Notification dated 6.9.1995 made under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, intended to acquire the land measuring an extent of 0.44.0 hector in Survey Nos.142/B2B3 in Moranapalli Village, Hosur Taluk, for the purpose of expansion of Hosur SIPCOT, Phase-II. After complying with the procedures, the Land Acquisition Officer acquired the land and passed an award assessing the compens...
S.Kalyani Vs. the District Manager
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2012
PrayerWrit petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the tender notice dated 01.02.2012 made in Na.Ka.No.C.V.9/30/12 and quash the said proceedings dated 01.02.2012 and consequently directing the respondent to issue a fresh tender notice in terms of Rule 10(1) of the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003 by inserting the tender conditions, viz., obtaining the no objection certificate from the owner of the building situated adjoining IMFS shop No.11813, located at No.5, Town Panchayat Complex, Kariapatti, so as to enable the Petitioner to participate in the tender after obtaining the tender application from the respondent.ORDER1. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.2. Heard Mr.A.Jenasenan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Muniyasami learned counsel for the respondent.3. Challenging a tender notification floated by the respon...
Rhizome Distilleries Pvt.Ltd Vs. Union of India
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2012
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the Order of the 2nd respondent dt.24.12.2010, made in ORA/248/08/TM/CH and to quash the same and to direct the 3rd respondent not to cancel/re-enter trademark registration No.1161682 in class 33 for the trademark 'IMPERIAL GOLD' from/in the Register of Trademarks.O R D E RR.SUBBIAH, J.,1. This writ petition has been filed to quash the order dated 24.12.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent/ Intellectual Property Appellate Board, directing the 3rd respondent, the Registrar of Trade Marks, to remove the writ petitioner's trade mark 'IMPERIAL GOLD', registered under No.116168 in Class 33 from the Register of Trade Marks, in the application filed by the 4th respondent herein under sections 11(1), 11(3), 11(10), 18 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Rule 2 of the Trade Marks (Applications and Appeals to the Intellectual Property Appellate Board) R...
Pandi Vs. the State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2012
PrayerCriminal Revision case filed under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records to the order dated 20.01.2012 in Cr.M.P.No.515 of 2012, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti in Crime No.375 of 2011, of the respondent/Police and to set aside the same.ORDER1. The person claiming to be the owner of the vehicle, namely, Tata Sumo bearing Registration No.TN 59 0571, Engine No. 483 DL 47 HZZ 757475, Chasis No.418005 HZZ 918968, which was produced as a case property before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti in Crime No.375 of 2011, on the file of Kayathar Police Station, is the petitioner in the present revision case.2. The above said case in Crime No.375 of 2011 was registered based on the complaint given by the revision petitioner that somebody caused mischief by setting fire to the above said vehicle and also 3 other vehicles. Admittedly vehicles were seized by the police and were produced before the above said M...
C.Elango Vs. the District Collector
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents 4 and 5 their men, servants, agents and subordinates from interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land situated in Kothur Village, Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District, to an extent of 11 cents comprised in S.No.279/2 by the petitioner.O R D E R1. Petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of prohibition, restraining the respondents 4 and 5 their men, servants, agents and subordinates from interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land situated in Kothur Village, Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District. Subsequently, petitioner has impleaded private respondents 6,7 and 8 to this writ, without amending the pleadings.2. The contention of the learned counsel is, that the 5th respondent has no right over the property owned by one P.G.Ravi. Therefore, the land alienated by him cannot be interfe...
Amenthara Babu Vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2012
Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C praying to call for the records of the learned Additional District Judge (FTC-I), Trichirappalli in Crl.A.No.144 of 2010 by judgment dated 05.11.2009, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai in C.C.No.257 of 2009 by the judgment dated 25.10.2010 and set aside the judgments of the courts below and acquit the petitioner.ORDER1. Mr.S.Kanagarajan, Advocate, who had filed the criminal revision case along with memo of appearance for the revision petitioner submits that long back the revision petitioner took back the bundle from him and instructed him not to conduct the criminal revision case stating that he would make his own arrangements.2.The criminal revision case, at the first instance, was listed on 18.10.2011 for admission. At the request made on behalf of the revision petitioner, the case came to be adjourned. Even after four months, the revision petitioner has not ch...
Palani Vs. the Principal Secretary
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-16-2012
COMMON PRAYERWrit Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in G.O.(1D)Nos.356 and 357, Urban Development and Panchayat (E2) Department, dated 16.07.2010, respectively, and confirming the order made in G.O.(2D)Nos.84 and 85, Urban Development and Panchayat (E2) Department, dated 03.12.2008, respectively, passed by the first respondent and quash the same and further, direct the respondents to give all service benefits to the petitioners.COMMON ORDER1. These two Writ Petitions are directed against the orders dated 16 July, 2010 on the file of Principal Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat (E2) Department, whereby and whereunder the review petitions filed by the petitioners were rejected.THE FACTS:W.P.(MD)No.10641 of 2010:2. The petitioner is an employee of Panchayat Department. He was issued with a charge sheet on 20 December, 2006, alleging that he threaten...
M.Sivaraman Vs. S.Veeraraghavan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-2012
PrayerCriminal Revision case filed under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code praying this Court to call for the records relating to the order dated 13.12.2011 made in M.C.No.33 of 2007, by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai and to set aside the same.ORDER1. Heard the submissions made by Mr.T.Antony Arulraj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revision petitioner and perused the grounds of revision, copy of the order of the court below challenged in the revision and also the connected records produced in the form of typed-set of papers.2. The petitioner in the revision petition filed a petition before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, claiming maintenance from his sons, who are respondents 1 and 2 herein, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The same was taken on file by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, on his file as M.C.No.33 of 2007.3. The respondents on receipt of summons filed a counter affidav...
S.Baskaran Vs. S.Tharabai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-2012
Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 25 of Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 praying to set aside the order dated 23.08.2011 made in R.C.A.No.212 of 2010 on the file of VII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, confirming the order dated 16.02.2010, made in RCOP.No.83 of 2009 on the file of XIV Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.O R D E R1. The revision petitioner is the tenant. The respondents/landlords filed the RCOP.No.83 of 2009 before the XIV Small Causes Court, Chennai, for eviction on the ground of additional accommodation and the same was ordered and confirmed in RCA.No.212 of 2010 on the file of the VIII Small Causes Court, Chennai. Hence this revision.2.It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner that admittedly the landlords are the owners of three shops facing New Avadi Road and the premises of the revision petitioner/tenant is the middle shop and the landlords/respondents are having office behind t...
Ttk Group Employees Union Vs. the Presiding Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-15-2012
Prayer : Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent pertaining to the proceedings in I.D.No.326 of 2002, quash the award dated 3.4.2006 and consequently reinstate the concerned workmen from the date of closure with backwages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits.O R D E R1. The petitioner is a trade union of workmen employed by the 2nd respondent management. In this Writ Petition, they have challenged an award passed by the Labour Court, Salem in I.D.No.326 of 2002. By the impugned award, the Labour Court dismissed the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner trade union and declined to grant any relief to 19 workers, whose retrenchment with effect from 10.3.2001 was the subject matter of the industrial dispute.2. The Writ Petition was admitted on 23.7.2007. On notice from this Court, the Registry summoned the original records for perusal by this Court and it has al...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »