Chennai Court June 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.
Ganesh Alias Lingesan Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records relating to the detention order in Memo No.601/BDFGISSV/2011, dated 25.11.2011 passed by the second respondent under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and quash the same and direct the respondent to produce the petitioner, Ganesh @ Lingesan, S/o.Subramani now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, before this Hon'ble Court and set the petitioner, Ganesh @ Lingesan, S/o.Subramani, at liberty.ORDER(Order of the Court was made by P.DEVADASS, J.)1. The petitioner, who has been detained under Act 14 of 1982 brandishing him a Goonda, challenges the detention order dated 25.11.2011.2. Noticing the adverse criminal statistics submitted by the sponsoring authority, the detaining authority coming to the subjective satisfaction that his remaining at large will be prejudicial to the maintenance of public order clamped the order of detention on the petitioner.3. Th...
Mr.S.Chidambaradhanu Vs. the Regional Manager
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to disburse the amount which stands in the credit of Mrs.K.Kamalam.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.2. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner would comply with all the requirements, prescribed by the Respondent bank, for the disbursement of the loan, which stands in the Term deposit account of K.Kamalam, said to be the mother of the petitioner, except the furnishing of two sureties as stipulated by the said bank. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the amount standing in the name of K.Kamalam, the mother of the petitioner, could be disbursed, only on the petitioner complying with the rules relating to such disbu...
Mrs.Jayanthi Vs. the Commissioner.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus to process, grant and release the building permission to the petitioners in respect of theland comprised in Survey No.339/3 (Part), 339/2, 338/4, 337/6,7, 8 and 9 in Dargah Road in Zamin Pallavarm within the limits of Pallavaram Municipality, by receiving the charges mentioned in notice dated 20.06.2011 without insisting for payment of vacant land tax mentioned in the said notice, within a reasonable time.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the the learned counsels appearing for the respondent.2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners had submitted that the only reason shown by the respondents for their refusal to process and release the building permission in respect of the land in question, is the non-payment of vacant land tax, by the petitioners, in respect of the said land. He had pointed out that the grounds on whi...
R.Vinoth, Son of Late Rajan Vs. Deputy General Manager,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the order, dated 13.03.2004, passed by the first respondent herein vide the proceedings IRD/184/254/2003-2004 rejecting the petitioner's claim for an appointment on compassionate grounds and to quash the same and further direct the first respondent to provide an appointment on compassionate grounds to the petitioner.O R D E R1. The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order, dated 13.03.2004, declining the request of the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment due to the death of the petitioner's father, as he died while in service on 16.07.1998.2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner's mother applied for compassionate appointment on 30.06.1999 and no reply was given either accepting or rejecting the request of the petitioner's mother. Thereafter, the petitioner also applied for compassionate appointment an...
K.Dhanalakshmi Vs. Arulmighu Dharmaraja Temple and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 27.4.2012 passed by the III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, in O.S.S.R.No.19401 of 2012.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 27.4.2012 passed by the III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, in O.S.S.R.No.19401 of 2012, this civil revision petition is filed.2. Heard Mr.K.B.Rajendran-the 5th revision petitioner herein/ party-in-person. All the five revision petitioners are present before this Court, who, in unison, through the fifth revision petitioner, would put forth and set forth their grievance as under:(i) The O.S.SR.No.19401 of 2012, contains the following prayer:a) set aside the judgement and decree passed in O.A.No.68 of 1976 order dated 24.5.1979 by the Deputy Commissioner, now the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Board, Chennai-600 034 under Section 63(a) of the Tamil Nadu HR & CE Act 22 of 1959.b) Direct that the order passed in O.A.No.68 of 1976 dated 24.5.1979 b...
Anand Alias Anand Kumar Vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
Prayer:Criminal appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C., against the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 18.05.2005, made in S.C.No.382 of 2004, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Fast Track Court No.III, Virudhachalam.1. This Criminal Appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 18.05.2005, made in S.C.No.382 of 2004, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Fast Track Court No.III, Coimbatore, whereby the accused/appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 392 r/w 397 IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default in payment, to undergo four months simple imprisonment.2. The respondent has filed a charge sheet against the accused stating that on 24.02.2004, at about 17.00 hours, at Gandhi Park bus stand in Coimbatore city, the accused approached witness Sharmila by riding a motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN 38L 3773 in a slow motion and...
T.Ramachandran Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
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 treat the petitioner as a retired officer on deemed retirement from 19.04.2004 afternoon and also direct the respondents to pay the petitioner his gratuity, general provident fund, Pension and all terminal benefits from the date of deemed retirement of the petitioner.O R D E R1. The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to pay to the petitioner gratuity, general provident fund, Pension and all terminal benefits in pursuance to his retirement from service under FR 56(3).2. The petitioner was working as Manager (Material) in District Industries Centre, Nagapattinam. The petitioner issued a notice under Rule 56(3) of Fundamental Rules seeking voluntary retirement. The notice was sent through registered post on 18.01.2004, which was received by...
iniyan Sampath Vs. S.Sridharan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
Civil revision petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as amended by Act 23/73 and 1 of 1980 against the judgment and decree dated 29.02.2012 passed by the learned VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in R.C.A.No.766 of 2010 in confirming the order and decree dated 20.09.2010 passed by the learned XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in RCOP No.213 of 2009.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 29.02.2012 passed by the learned VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in R.C.A.No.766 of 2010 in confirming the order and decree dated 20.09.2010 passed by the learned XII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in RCOP No.213 of 2009., this civil revision petition has been focussed by the tenant.2. The parties, for convenience sake, are referred to here under according to their litigative status and ranking before the Rent Controller.3. The long and short of the germane facts, in a few broad strokes could be...
P.Baskarraj Vs. the State Rep. by the Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to change the name in the birth certificate as Baskarraj instead of Venkatachalam by considering the petitioner representation dated 11.10.2011 filed by the petitioner and in accordance with law.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.2. Though the prayer sought for by the petitioner, in the present writ petition, is for a larger relief, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that it would suffice, if the representation of the petitioner, dated 11.10.2011, is directed to be disposed of by the respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels app...
Sumathi Devi and ors. Vs. Basanthi Bai and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-22-2012
Prayer: Suit is filed under Order XXIV Rule 1 O.S. Rules 1956 r/w Order VII Rule 1 C.P.C., seeking the following reliefs:a.For declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to 1/3rd share in the 1/3rd share of Late.Ramlal Sharma in the properties described in suit schedule A and B;b.For a partition by metes and bounds of the property more fully described in suit schedule A and B;c.For permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 8, their men, agents, servants, or any person claiming through or under them from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs in the property bearing Old Door No.157, New No.323, Mint Street, Sowcarpet, Chennai-600 079 (more fully described in the suit schedule A & B);d.For recovery of Rs.4,32,000/- from the defendants 1 to 8 towards mesne profits in respect of the properties described in the suit schedule A & B; ande.For future mesne profits in respect of the properties described in the suit schedule A & B.J U D ...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »