Chennai Court April 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.
K.K.Veerasamy Vs. N.Periyasamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.A.No.155 of 2004, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Coimbatore and set aside the modification of the sentence imposed on the first respondent and confirm the sentence imposed on the first respondent in C.C.No.723 of 2004, dated 09.03.2004 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-III, Coimbatore.C.S.KARNAN, J.ORDER1. The revision petitioner / respondent / complainant has preferred this Criminal Revision in Crl.R.C.No.920 of 2006 against the judgment made in C.A.No.155 of 2004, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Coimbatore modifying the conviction and sentence made in C.C.No.723 of 2003, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-III, Coimbatore.2. The complainant's case is as follows:-The accused had borrowed a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- from the complainant, on 19.08.1998, promising to repay the said amount ...
P.Ganesan, and ors. Vs. the State of Tamilnadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, to call for the records of the notice having Ref.No.Na.Ka. No.2499/2005/E3 dated 30.12.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to record the transfer of patta relating to the 63.22.5 hectares of agricultural land in Survey No.1198 etc Village Patta No.49 in OOttamalai Village Pennagaram Taluk Dharmapuri District morefully described in the annexure to the Writ petition in favour of the Petitioners in the Village and Taluk records of Pennagara Taluk Dharmapuri District.VINOD K.SHARMA, J.ORDER1. The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the notice dated 30.12.2011 passed by the Tahsildar, inviting objections against the proposed eviction of the petitioners.2. It is pleaded, that the land in dispute was assign...
Niligiri Timber Firm. Vs. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the letter Na.Ka.No.318/2011 dated 3.2.2012 issued by the third respondent and direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application under Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 and issue licence to petitioner's Sawmill M/s.Nilirigi Timber Firm.R.SUDHAKAR, J.ORDER1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the letter Na.Ka.No.318/2011 dated 3.2.2012 issued by the third respondent and direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application under Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 and issue licence to petitioner's Sawmill M/s.Nilirigi Timber Firm.2. Mr.Muralidharan, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up...
K.S.Rajendran. and ors. Vs. the District Collector, Collectorate, Nama ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent, pertaining to the Circular in Na.Ka.No.364/2012/A3 dated 14.3.2012 and quash the same.R.SUDHAKAR, J.COMMON ORDER1. Writ Petitions are filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent, pertaining to the Circular in Na.Ka.No.364/2012/A3 dated 14.3.2012 and quash the same.2. The prayer in all the five writ petitions is one and the same. By consent, all the five writ petitions are taken up together for final disposal.3. All the five petitioners claimed to be the owners of agricultural land and they are drawing water from the well situate in the property by using oil engine for the purpose of supplying drinking water on payment of meagre amount to the benefit of villagers who do not have water facility. This is objected to by some disgruntled villagers and they hav...
R.Anban So.Rajagopal, and anr. Vs. the Tamilnadu Housing Board, and or ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, to call for the records of the 2nd respondent relating to the Orientation Sketch dated 14.7.2011 issued in favour of the 3rd respondent herein in respect of property situate in Block No.38 comprised in T.S.No.14 Block No.71 Kodambakkam Village Mambalam-Guindy Taluk Chennai District and quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents herein their men agents servants subordinates or any other person or persons claiming through them or authorized by them from in any manner interfering with the rights of the petitioners in enjoying and developing their property situate at Block No.39 comprised in T.S.No.14 Block No.71 Kodambakkam Village Mambalam-Guindy Taluk, Chennai District.VINOD K.SHARMA, J.ORDER1. The petitioners have approached this Court with ...
P.Selvakumar Vs. A.R.Dhinakaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
Petition filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C, 1908 directing the defendant to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff with respect of the house and ground bearing New No.2/47, part of Old Door No.47, Anandavelu Mudali Street, Perambur, Chennai 11, comprised in part of R.S.No.434/59, measuring to an extent of 2853 sq.ft, morefully described in the schedule hereunder, by receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs.42,25,000/- (Rupees forty two lakhs twenty five thousand only) within the time fixed by this Court failing which the Court may be pleased to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, for a direction to the defendant to deliver vacant possession of the schedule mentioned property to the plaintiff, for permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men, servants and agents in any way alienating the schedule mentioned property in favour of any third parties and for the costs of the ...
P.Ponnambaladasan Vs. the Government of Tamilnadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records in respect of the order of the third respondent in No.3680/A1/07 dated 01.06.2007 and subsequent order No.10791/A3/2003 dated 23.11.2007 issued by the second respondent and quash the same and directing the respondents to comply with the order of appointment issued to the petitioner in Order No.6614/A1/98 dated 29.04.1999.K.CHANDRU, J.ORDER1. The petitioner in this writ petition earlier filed O.A.No.3619 of 1999 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. The prayer before the Tribunal was for a direction to appoint him as Night watchman as per the order dated 29.04.1999.2. The Tribunal by its order dated 08.07.1999 admitted the Original Application and ordered notice to the respondents. On notice from the Tribunal, the District Registrar, Villupuram filed a reply affidavit dated 04.10.1999. In the reply affidavit, it was stated that he was not sel...
Madivadhanam Vs. SarojA.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree of the Additional Sub-Court, Mayiladuthurai dated 19.01.2001 made in A.S.No.46/2000 reversing the judgment and decree of the Additional District Munsif Court, Mayiladuthurai dated 12.01.2000 made in O.S.No.52 of 1993.V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH, J.JUDGMENT1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.46 of 2000 dated 19.01.2001 in reversing the judgment of the trial court made in O.S.No.52 of 1993 dated 12.01.2000 in dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff.2. The appellant herein was the defendant and the respondent herein was the plaintiff before the trial court.3. The case of the plaintiff as stated in her plaint would be as follows:-The suit property as described in the schedule belongs to the plaintiff. The plaintiff purchased the same for a valid consideration along with other property from Abdul Kader and others by means of a registered Sale Deed dated 4.11.1982. The plaintiff took po...
K.Palaniammal, Vs. the Tahsildar, and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 01/02/2012.VINOD K.SHARMA, J.ORDER1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 01/02/2012, addressed to the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, requesting for grant of patta.2. It is pleaded by petitioner, that the petitioner applied to respondent no.1 for grant of patta, for the land falling in S.No.52/2B. The petitioner has purchased this land from M.Dhanapal vide sale deed dated 20.09.2011 and rectification deed dated 11.10.2011.3. It is submission of petitioner that in spite of sale by Mrs.Vellachiyammal to Mr.M.Dhanapal, the vendor of the petitioner, the patta was wrongly shown in the name of Mr.M.Dhanapal and Marigounder.4. Mrs.Amirtham and her sons had filed R.E.P...
R.Sekar Vs. Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-20-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to call for records and quash the order passed in proceedings No.Y2/109061/95 dt 29.4.2000 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Admn.) Chepauk hennai5 the 2nd respondent herein and confirmed by the Prl.Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Chepauk Chennai-5, the 1st respondent herein in proceedings No.Y2/40322/2000 dated 06.09.2000 and to treat the period of suspension from 20.12.1995 to 25.2.1998 as on duty.VINOD K.SHARMA, J.ORDER1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the consequential order in pursuance to imposing of minor punishment of treating the period of suspension, as the period spent on leave of the kind due.2. The petitioner was served with charge memo dated 24.05.1996, on the following charges:"i) the applicant was absent in the office after 3.20p.m. On 2...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »