Chennai Court June 2012 Judgments
Mrs.R.Vanaja Vs. Mr.Singamani and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 8.3.2012 passed by the District Judge, Thiruvallur, in O.S.S.R.No.2885 of 2001.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 8.3.2012 passed by the District Judge, Thiruvallur, in O.S.S.R.No.2885 of 2001 this revision petition has been filed.2. The long and short of the germane facts in a few broad strokes can be encapsulated thus:The revision petitioner herein filed the plaint in O.S.S.R.No.2885 of 2001 with the following prayer:"to grant a judgement and decree against the defendants:a) for declaration declaring that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property morefully described in the schedule hereunder consequentially directing the defendants, their men, agents, servants or any one claiming under them or acting on their behalf to hand over the possession of the schedule mentioned property within a stipulated period.b) for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, servants or any one claiming ...
Tag this Judgment!The Muthavalli of Larabsha Dharga Vs. the Panruti Municipality,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 83(9) proviso of the Wakf Act, 1995, against the fair and decreetal order, dated 17.02.2010, passed in I.A.No.51 of 2010, in O.S.No.75 of 2001, on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore.Prayer in C.R.P.(NPD)No.2320 of 2010 : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 83(9) proviso of the Wakf Act, 1995, against the judgment and decree, dated 31.03.2010, passed in O.S.No.75 of 2001, on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge (Wakf Tribunal) Cuddalore.COMMON O R D E R1. Civil Revision Petition (N.P.D) No.1607 of 2010, is filed against the judgment and decree, dated 31.03.2010, passed in O.S.No.75 of 2001, on the file of the Wakf Tribunal/Principal Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore.2. Civil Revision Petition (N.P.D) No.2916 of 2010, is filed against the order, dated 17.02.2010, passed in I.A.No.51 of 2010, in O.S.No.75 of 2001, on the file of the learned Principal...
Tag this Judgment!Tagros Chemicals Limited Vs. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent's impugned Memo.No.CE/Comml./EE/R&C/AEE/F.R.&C/D.No.70-1/12 dated 12.03.2012 and quash the same.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent's impugned Memo.No.CE/Comml./EE/R&C/AEE/F.R.&C/D.No.70-1/12 dated 12.03.2012 and quash the same.2. Thiru R.S.Pandiyaraj, learned counsel appears for the petitioner. Thiru G.Vasudevan, learned counsel appears for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.3. The writ petition has been filed by petitioner company who is consumer of High Tension Electricity. Petitioner also buy power through third party source, like, windmill generators/CPP through the Open Access facility provided by the respondents. This issue has been considered by this court in a batch of writ petitions, viz., W....
Tag this Judgment!Ms M.S.M.Abdul Raheem Vs. Ms Precious Carrying Corporation (P) Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, against the Judgment and Decree dated 17.02.2006 made in R.C.A.No.1439 of 1996 by the Learned VII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, in reversing the order and decree made in R.C.O.P.No.1303 of 1995 on the file of XI Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.ORDER1. The landlords are the revision petitioners herein. The revision petitioners/landlords filed a Petition in RCOP.No.1303 of 1995 for eviction, on the ground of sub-let by the 1st respondent to the 2nd respondent, without the written consent of the revision petitioners/landlords.2. The case of the revision petitioners/landlords was that, originally, the 2nd respondent was the tenant of the petition premises, bearing Door No.15, situate at Armenian Street, G.T., Chennai 600 001 and in the year 1984 at the instance of 2nd respondent, the tenancy, was transferred in favour of the first respondent and a lease deed, dated 06.09.1984...
Tag this Judgment!R.Geetha Kumari Vs. Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the third Respondent to provide to the petitioner a separate electricity service connection without reference to the First and Second Respondents for the premises bearing No.2A, Kumaragurunatha Mudali Street, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.O R D E R1. Heard Mr.Manoj Sreevalsan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kandasamy, learned Special Government Pleader (H.R& C.E.), appearing for the first Respondent, Mr.Varadharajan, learned counsel appearing for the second Respondent and Mr.G.Vasudevan, learned counsel appearing for the third Respondent.2. The residential premises bearing Door No.2A, Kumaragurunatha Mudali Street, Mylapore, belongs to the second Respondent Thirukkvoil, was allotted to the petitioner by the first Respondent, vide allotment order dated 28.02.2011. The petitioner has paid the advance security deposit amount of Rs.7740/-, as well as donation ...
Tag this Judgment!Thulasi Vs. K.Duraisamy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC against the fair and decreetal order made in I.A.No.198 of 2005 in O.S.No.56 of 2004 dated 06.08.2007.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 06.08.2007 passed in I.A.No.198 of 2005 in O.S.No.56 of 2004, by the learned Subordinate Judge, Mettur, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts in a few broad strokes, could be encapsulated thus:The first respondent herein filed the suit O.S.No.56 of 2004 seeking specific performance of the agreement to sell. After filing the written statement, the defendant remained ex parte; whereupon an ex parte decree was passed and subsequently, an I.A. was filed to get the delay of 95 days condoned in filing the application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC. The said application was dismissed. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, this revision was filed with a miscellaneous petition, to get the delay condoned, but that application...
Tag this Judgment!Deivasigamani Vs. T.K.Kuppusamy Grounder, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 23.8.2010 passed by the Principal Sub-Court, Erode, in E.A.No.47 of 2010 in E.P.No.26 of 2004 in O.S.No.253 of 1976.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated dated 23.8.2010 passed by the Principal Sub-Court, Erode, in E.A.No.47 of 2010 in E.P.No.26 of 2004 in O.S.No.253 of 1976, this revision petition has been filed.2. Broadly but briefly, narratively but precisely, the germane facts in a few broad strokes can be encapsulated thus:(i) The Executing Court in E.P.26 of 2004 passed the order dated 7.1.2009 as against the revision petitioner herein/judgement debtor, imposing a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default to undergo imprisonment for 15 days.(ii) There was non-compliance with the said order in paying the fine amount. Whereupon E.A.No.47 of 2010 was filed to get extension of time to pay the fine amount.(iii) The Executing Court dismissed the said E.A.3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, this civil revision...
Tag this Judgment!Mr.S.Ragendran Vs. Mrs.N.Ambika
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act, 1980, against the order, dated 27.11.2007, passed in R.C.O.P.No.1044 of 2006, on the file of the XVI Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, confirmed in R.C.A.No.126 of 2008, dated 23.7.2009, on the file of the VIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act, 1980, against the order, dated 27.11.2007, passed in R.C.O.P.No.2177of 2006, on the file of the XVI Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, confirmed in R.C.A.No.794 of 2007, dated 23.7.2009, on the file of the VIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.COMMON O R D E R1. The tenant is the revision petitioner herein and the landlady is the respondent herein.2. The respondent/landlady filed a Petition in R.C.O.P.No.1044 of 2006, for eviction of the tenant, on the ground of wilful default in the payment of rent, owner's occupation and act of was...
Tag this Judgment!D.Thangavelu Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2012
Writ Petition No.23656 of 2010 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to retrospectively promote the petitioner in the cadre of Health Inspector with effect from 01.02.1973 and consequently regularize his service in the above post with all monetary benefits by extending the benefits of G.O.(D) No.359, Health and Family Welfare Department, dated 26.04.2004 which is covered under order dated 13.07.2007 in W.P.No.29794 of 2005 etc.,COMMON ORDER1. Writ Petition No.23656 of 2010 is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to retrospectively promote the petitioner in the cadre of Health Inspector with effect from 01.02.1973 and consequently regularize his service in the above post with all monetary benefits by extending the benefits of G.O.(D) No.359, Health and Family Welfare Department, dated 26.04.2004 which is covered under order dated 13.07.2007 in W.P.No.29794 of 2005 etc.,2. The...
Tag this Judgment!K.Kousalya Vs. the Director of School Education
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-28-2012
PRAYERPetitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the third respondent relating to Pro.Na.Ka.No. 7731/B5/2006, dated 07.11.2006, to quash the same and to issue consequential directions to the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner herein as Junior Grade Tamil Assistant from 15.03.2005 and to permit the fourth respondent to disburse the salary due and payable to the petitioner within a time frame.ORDER1. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Grade Tamil Assistant in the fourth respondent school, on 15.03.2005. Thereafter, the school sent proposals for an approval from the third respondent. The third respondent passed an order, dated 07.11.2006, refusing to approve the appointment of the petitioner on the ground that there were only five sanctioned posts for the year 2004-2005 and there were already five Teachers working in their school. The petitioner has filed the present ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »