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.
N.Mohan Vs. the Superintendent of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
Prayer: Writ Petition came to be numbered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by way of transfer of Original Application in O.A.No.6946 of 2001 to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent herein in his proceedings P.R.No.115/C1/1999, dated 29.9.2000 pending the disposal of the Original Application.O R D E R:1. The petitioner joined the police service as Grade II Constable on 17.1.1986 and was promoted as Grade-I Constable in the year 1999. The petitioner while working at Vikkiramangalam Police Station, was placed under suspension by the Superintendent of Police, Perambalur District. The petitioner was required to be present at the headquarters at Perambalur.2. The petitioner was asked to report to the Superintendent of Police on 19.3.1999, but, the petitioner failed to appear before the Superintendent of Police.3. The petitioner was served with a charge memo, on the charge that the petitioner had failed to appear before the Superinte...
Mrs.K.R.Saraswathi. Vs. State Rep. by Deputy Superintendent of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
Prayer :-Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records and set-aside the order dated 07.10.2008 in Crl.M.P.No.378 of 2007 in Special C.C.No.1 of 2005 on the file of the learned Special Judge-I / X Additional Judge, Chennai.ORDER1. The nutshell of the case are as follows:-The revision petitioner / accused No.20 had filed a discharge petition in Crl.M.P.No.378 of 2007 in Special C.C.No.1 of 2005 to discharge him in Crime No.9/AC/96/HQ for the offences under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act and under Section 109 IPC, stating that the revision petitioner has not abetted with Thiru.S.Kannappan, as alleged in the final report. The petitioner further stated that there are no material evidence to show that the petitioner has abetted Thiru.S.Kannappan to acquire assets in forms of land, house sites, house buildings, investments in banks, deposits as alleged in the final report. Actually, the petitioner had derived an annual in...
Ms.Hindu Dharma Sakthi, Vs. the Government of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the first and second respondents herein not to certify any feature film for public exhibition, which has scenes depicting Hindu Religious Sanyasis, Spiritual Gurus or leaders in a bad taste or defaming, insulting or abusing them or making / creating them as an object of mockery / comedy and consequently direct the fifth and sixth respondents herein to remove the scenes involving Comedy Artist Saminathan wearing saffron dress and appearing in the name of 'Ulunthurpettai Ulangananda' and hurting the Hindu Religious sentiments in the Tamil feature film "OK OK Oru Kal Oru Kannadi" permanently.O R D E R1. M/s.Hindu Dharma Sakthi, a registered society, has filed this writ petition for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, for directing the first and second respondents herein not to certify the feature films for public exhibition, which have the scenes ...
Nilgiris Timbers. Vs. the Additional Principal Conservator
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.355/2011 dated 15.3.2012 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the petitioner's application dated 15.2.2010 for renewing the petitioner's license for running Sawmill as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 within a stipulated time.O R D E R1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.355/2011 dated 15.3.2012 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the petitioner's application dated 15.2.2010 for renewing the petitioner's license for running Sawmill as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 within a stipulate...
K.R.Chandrasekaran Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
PRAYER in W.P.No.950 of 2012: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Declaration, declaring that Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 is null and void.PRAYER in W.P.No.30223 of 2011: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Declaration, declaring that the order of the fourth respondent in Crl.M.P.No.946 of 2011, dated 16.8.2011 passed under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 is null and void and consequently direct respondents 2 and 3 to follow the procedure prescribed under Section 13(2) and Section 13(4) of the Act before resorting to Section 14 of the Act.PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in C.M.P.No.421 of 2011 on the file of the Chief Judicial M...
A.Badhrachalam Vs. the Principal Secretary
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
Prayer:This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the second respondent in his proceedings Roc.No.26566/2011/A1 dated 6.1.2012 in respect of non inclusion of the petitioner's name in the panel of Deputy Tahsildars for the year 2011 in Krishnagiri District and to quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to include the petitioner's name above M.Munusamy (sl.No.12) and below V.Shanmugam (Sl.No.11) in the panel of Deputy Tahsildars for the year 2011 vide proceedings Roc.No.26566/2011/A1 dated 6.1.2012.O R D E R1. The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the proceedings of the second respondent dated 6.1.2012 in respect of non inclusion of the petitioner's name in the panel of Deputy Tahsildars for the year 2011 in Krishnagiri District and to direct the second respondent to include the petitioner's name above M.Munusamy (sl.No.12) and belo...
S.Gunasekaran, Vs. the Secretary to Government and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's Revision No.19052/HCS/2010 filed under section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 against the order passed by the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies (Housing), Chennai in R.C.No.7562/2009 SF1 Dated 14.05.2010 in accordance with law within the time to be fixed by this Court.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's Revision No.19052/HCS/2010 filed under section 153 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 against the order passed by the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies (Housing), Chennai in R.C.No.7562/2009 SF1 Dated 14.05.2010 in accordance with law within the time to be fixed by this Court.2. Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the fi...
The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Tvl. Sri.Ramtirth International
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
REVISION filed before the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, Chennai to revise the order dated 18.1.2000 made in C.T.A.No.214 of 1998 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore for the assessment year 1995-96.O R D E R(Order of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.)1. The Revenue is on appeal against the order of the Tribunal made in C.T.A.No.214 of 1998 dated 18.1.2000 raising the following substantial question of law:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances, the Tribunal is legally correct in holding that Ramthirth Brhmi Oil is taxable at 5% under Entry 20 Part C 1st Schedule as ayurvedic medicine and not falling under Entry 1(ii) of Part F of 1st Schedule ? 2. The assessment year relates to 1995-96. During the relevant point of time, there were two entries one dealing with medicine and the other dealing with hair oil. The entries as they appear in the statute read as under:-Sl.No. Description of the Goods Point of levy Rate of ...
V.K.Palanisamy and ors. Vs. the Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu and ors ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorari, to call for the records, relating to Section 4(1) notification made in G.O.Ms.No.516, Industries (MII), dated 08.09.2000 and the consequent Section 6 Declaration made in G.O.(2D)No.56, Industries Department, dated 06.09.2001, on the file of the first respondent herein and quash the same.O R D E R1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the acquisition notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, made in G.O.Ms.No.516, Industries (MII), dated 08.09.2000 and Section 6 Declaration made in G.O.Ms.No.56, Industries Department, dated 06.09.2001.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was the owner of agricultural lands in S.Nos.106, 159, 163, 241, 246 and 247 Perundurai. The Government of Tamil Nadu sought to acquire lands for the purpose of setting up an industrial estate, at Perundurai, under the control of the erstwhile Tamil Nadu Corporatio...
S.Suresh Vs. the District Magistrate
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-17-2012
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records comprised in No.3682/DM/D1/2011, dated 24.11.2011 on the file of the first respondent, quash the same and consequently to direct the first respondent to issue fresh arms licence to the petitioner based upon his application dated 25.4.2011.ORDERQuestion raised :1. Whether a Lawyer who has to hold law books can be allowed to hold a Revolver for his protection and whether the licensing authority's power to refuse a licence in his favour was justified? are the questions to be decided in this writ petition.Present state of the Bar :2. Before proceeding with the issue on hand, it is necessary to recapitulate the role of a member of the Bar in the society as set out by the Supreme Court in O.P. Sharma v. High Court of Punjab and Haryana reported in (2011) 6 SCC 86. In paragraphs 17 and 20, the Supreme Court had observed as follows:"1...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »