Chennai Court July 2012 Judgments
The Registrar (Judicial). Vs. the Secretary to Government and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
PrayerSuo motu Writ Petition on the Newspaper report in Hindu Daily dated 25.06.2012 seeking for writ of mandamus directing the respondents to take effective emergent steps to remove the plastic waste that choked in Vaigai river, to remove the trash overflows at the canal that connecting Melamadai and Sadasiva Nagar, to restrict and control the burning of garbage at Samayanallur and to restore the sanctity at Pandikovil which is spoiled by the devotees by leaving the place littered with waste.ORDER1. Regarding dumping of plastic waste in Vaigai river and burning of waste in Samayanallur village and also in Pandikovil area, based on the photo featured in English Daily "The Hindu" on 25.06.2012, this suo motu writ petition was taken up and notice was ordered to the respondents.2. Earlier, on 29.6.2012, affidavit was filed by 4th respondent the Commissioner of Corporation of Madurai stating that steps had been taken to remove the garbage in the canal connecting Melamadai and Sathasiva nag...
Tag this Judgment!Poochangu Nadar. Vs. K.Marimuthu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Civil revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India due to the time elapsed 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 20.02.2012 passed by the learned VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in R.C.A.No.9 of 2007 in confirming the order and decree dated 15.09.2006 passed by the learned XIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in RCOP No.1549 of 2004.ORDER1. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners would submit that this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India would lie in view of the fact that unwittingly, the regular CRP under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act could not be filed.2. I would like to highlight the trite proposition that as against the judgment and decree passed in RCA, only statutory CRP is contemplated. Having lost the opportunity of filing statutory CRP w...
Tag this Judgment!J.Keerthi. Vs. the Commissioner, and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from reducing the petitioner's shop plinth area by dividing the said shop as two shops situated in Southern side of the Traffic Police Booth, New Bus Stand, Ranipet, Vellore District.O R D E R1. Heard Mr.C.Prakasam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms.V.M.Velumani, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.2. The prayer in the writ petition is to forbear the respondents from reducing the petitioner's shop plinth area by dividing the said shop as two shops situated in Southern side of the Traffic Police Booth, New Bus Stand, Ranipet, Vellore District.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Respondent Municipality is trying to divide the petitioner's shop into two shops which will result in reducing the plinth area of the petitioner's shop. The learned counsel for respondents relies upon the reso...
Tag this Judgment!M.Alamelu. Vs. K.Ganesan.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
PrayerThis Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 3.2.2011 made in IA.No.326/2009 in OS.No.22/2009 by the learned District Munsif, Pudukottai.ORDER1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 3.2.2011 made in IA.No.326/2009 in OS.No.22/ 2009 by the learned District Munsif, Pudukottai.2. The above said suit was filed by the Respondent/Plaintiff for declaration that the settlement deed dated 10.01.2005 said to have been executed by Jayalakshmi/2nd Defendant in the suit and the deceased Karuppaiyan in favour of the Revision Petitioner/1st Defendant is null and void and not binding upon the Plaintiff and for permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.3. The plaint allegations are that the suit properties have been purchased by the Plaintiff's Aunt Mariyayee through five registered sale deeds and was in possession and enjoyment of the same as owner of the suit properti...
Tag this Judgment!Thilakavathi. Vs. R.Gopal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act against the order passed in RCA No.799 of 2010 by the learned VII Small Cause Judge, Chennai on 13.03.2012 against in RCOP No.2548 of 2008 by the learned XVI Small Causes Judge, Chennai on 29.07.2010.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 13.03.2012 passed in RCA No.799 of 2010 by the learned VII Small Cause Judge, Chennai, confirming the order dated 29.07.2010 passed in RCOP No.2548 of 2008 by the learned XVI Small Causes Judge, Chennai, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this revision would run thus:(i) The respondent/landlord filed the petition as against the revision petitioner/tenant invoking Section 10(3)(a)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act'], for additional accommodation. The matter was resisted.(ii) During en...
Tag this Judgment!Ms. Buhari Hotels and Motels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Chief Engineer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Prayer:- W.P.No.17036 of 2012 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to give Electricity Service Connection to the petitioner premises situated at New Door No.6, First Avenue, Shastri Nagar, Adayar, Chennai-600 020 comprised in T.S.No.1/2, Block No.29, Urur Village Mylapore and Taluk, Chennai-600 020, without insisting on Completion Certification from the 6th Respondent.W.P.No.17037 of 2012 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to give Water and Sewerage Connection to the petitioner premises situated at New Door No.6, First Avenue, Shastri Nagar, Adayar, Chennai-600 020 comprised in T.S.No.1/2, Block No.29, Urur Village Mylapore and Taluk, Chennai-600 020, without insisting on Completion Certification from the 4th Respondent.O R D E R1. Heard Mr.S.Sundaresan, learned counsel appearing...
Tag this Judgment!The Branch Manager. Vs. S.Ramalakshmi and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Order dated made in M.C.O.P. No.428 of 2004 dated 05.01.2006 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge), Tenkasi.UDGMENTR.BANUMATHI,J1. Being aggrieved by the award of compensation of Rs.34,45,678/- awarded to the Claimants for the death of Saravana Ayyappan in the road traffic accident on 12.04.2004, the Appellant-Insurance company preferred this appeal.2. Brief facts are that on 12.4.2004 at about 1.30 hours, deceased Saravana Ayyappan was driving Qualis car bearing registration No.TN-09 AA 9396 from Kancheepuram to Madras. When the car was proceeding near Kancheepuram, the lorry bearing registration No.TCT 9514 was proceeding infront of the car on the same direction and both the vehicles were proceeding near Vedal Saravana Petrol Pump Station. At that time the lorry driver drove the lorry in a rash and negligent manner and suddenly turned the lorry towards right side...
Tag this Judgment!Murugaiyan. Vs. Vanchilingam.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as against the order dated 24.01.2011 passed by the learned District Munsif, Mannargudi in E.A.No.311 of 2010 in E.P.No.19 of 2009 in O.S.No.222 of 2007.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 24.01.2011 passed by the learned District Munsif, Mannargudi in E.A.No.311 of 2010 in E.P.No.19 of 2009 in O.S.No.222 of 2007, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, who would echo the cri de coeur of his client to the effect that the lower court simply rejected the prayer of the judgment debtor to recall the order attaching his salary, even though the judgment debtor was paying regularly a sum of Rs.1,000/- every month.3. Perused the order, which would clearly exemplify that the total decree amount was Rs.47,711.50 ps and the judgment debtor was directed to pay Rs.3,500/- every month; but he was paying only a sum of Rs.1,000/- every month. Whereupon, attachment of sa...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs.R.Chandra and ors. Vs. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to entertain, consider and grant approval to the demolition plan and planning permission, planning permit and building permit for construction of Flats in Block Nos.138 to 148 Geethanjali colony, 7th Avenue, Anna Nagar West, Chennai-40 comprised in S.Nos.185 (part), 186 (Part) and 187 (part) in Padi Village, S.Nos.221(Part) in Koyambedu Revenue Village (Koyambedu Revenue Village now comes under Thirumangalam Revenue Village), S.Nos.141 (part), 142(part), 152 (part) and 154 (part) in Villivakkam Village, admeasuring 70618 sq. ft. jointly owned by the petitioners based on the orientation sketch issued by the Tamilnadu Housing Board without insisting patta from revenue authorities.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to entertain, consider and grant approval to the demolition p...
Tag this Judgment!Mr.M.Palanichamy. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Declaration, declaring that when the jurisdiction with regard to the settlement of dispute is restricted between the parties by an agreement at Chennai, proceedings launched by the third respondent outside the agreed jurisdiction at Mumbai in Case No.23196/SS/2009 before 62nd Metropolitan Magistrate Court is not valid and binding in so far as the petitioner is concerned.O R D E R1. Whether the High Court of Judicature, Madras, can issue a writ in the nature of Declaration and set at naught the proceedings initiated on a private complaint under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, before the criminal court outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Madras High Court is the moot question raised in this writ petition. 2. At the foremost, it has to be taken note of that the petitioner has already raised a similar question before the Bombay High Court in Criminal Wr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »