Chennai Court July 2012 Judgments
S. Gnanaprakasam. Vs. Lazer Panikuppam Village.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A. No: 461 of 2011 in O.S. No: 123 of 2008 dated 19.10.2011 on the file of the District Munsif, Panruti.O R D E R1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against an order of the learned District Munsif, Panruti, passed in I.A. No: 461 of 2011 in O.S. No: 123 of 2008 dated 19.10.2011.2. The revision petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondent is the defendant. The suit is one for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The defendant has filed his written statement. After framing issues, the suit was posted for trial on 13.07.2009 and subsequent to that on various dates and finally it was posted on 08.01.2011. In the meanwhile, the respondent defendant has filed an application in I.A. No: 124 of 2011 and being a senior citizen he prayed for an early hearing of the matter. Therefore, that application was allowed by the trial Court an the matter has been...
Tag this Judgment!P.Thangadurai. Vs. T.Ekambaram.
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 judgment and decree passed in RCA No.2 of 2006 by the Subordinate Court, Tiruvallur on 04.06.2009 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Rent Controller (District Munsif) Tiruvallur in RCOP No.12 of 2000 on 13.12.2005.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 04.06.2009 passed in RCA No.2 of 2006 by the Subordinate Court, Tiruvallur, confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Rent Controller (District Munsif) Tiruvallur in RCOP No.12 of 2000 on 13.12.2005, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. Broadly but briefly, narratively but precisely, the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this revision would run thus:(i) The respondent/landlord filed the RCOP on the grounds of (i) Wilful default, and (ii)Demolition and reconstruction invoking Section 10 (2) (i) and Section 14(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent ...
Tag this Judgment!K.Kirubasankar. Vs. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and ors.
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 to 4 to receive, consider the application and provide Electricity Service Connection to the flats in Block "A" in S.No.493/7, 667/1C, Sholinganallur Village, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai, Tambaram Taluk, together with common passages and terrace therein, without insisting on production of Completion Certificate/ No Objection Certificate from the 5th respondent or any other authorities concerned expeditiously and in accordance with law.ORDER1. This writ petition is filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to receive, consider the application and provide Electricity Service Connection to the flats in Block "A" in S.No.493/7, 667/1C, Sholinganallur Village, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai, Tambaram Taluk, together with common passages and terrace therein, without insisting on production of Completion Certificate/ No...
Tag this Judgment!Am.Athanooramman Podarayasamy. Vs. Assistant Commissioner and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India for the relief of issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings Nada.Na.Ka.No.2438/2011/A3 dated 16.8.2011 and quash the same.ORDER1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order Nada.Na.K.No.2348/2011/A3 dated 16.8.2011 appointing a fit person to manage the affairs of Athanooramman Podarayasamy and Karuppusamy temple.2. The petitioner claims to be managing the affairs of the above said temple as President of registered Arakkattallai. The temple is a private temple. It is submitted by the petitioner that this private temple is being managed by three sub sects of Kongu Vellala community namely (i) Kaadai Kulam (2) Sengunni Kulam and (3) Aandai Kulam living in five districts i.e., Erode, Coimbatore, Thirupur, Salem and Dindigul.3. The temp...
Tag this Judgment!S.Muthusamy. Vs. the Assistant Engineer and ors.
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 to effect transfer of Electricity Service Connection bearing SC No.245-001-1475 of Madappur Distribution in respect of agricultural land comprised in Survey No.801/1A, 801/2, Madapur village, in the name of the petitioner.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to effect transfer of Electricity Service Connection bearing SC No.245-001-1475 of Madappur Distribution in respect of agricultural land comprised in Survey No.801/1A, 801/2, Madapur village, in the name of the petitioner.2. Mr.S.K.Rameshwar, learned counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.3. The mandamus has been filed to direct the respondents to transfer electricity service connection in respect of the agricultural land. In this regard, petitioner has made an application ...
Tag this Judgment!Appourva J.Patel. Vs. the Inspector General of Registration and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent in O.E.No.1/2010 dated 7.4.2011 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to cancel the registration of the Sale Deed pursuant to the aforesaid order.O R D E R1. The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging an order passed by the second respondent viz., the District Registrar, directing the compulsory registration of a Sale Deed dated 21.6.2010 claimed to have been executed by the petitioner in favour of the third respondent herein.2. I have heard Mr.P.Vasanthakumar Visveswaran, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.M.C.Swamy, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.N.R.Chandran, learned Senior Counsel for the third respondent.3. The facts, on which there are no disputes, are as follows:-(i) The third respondent herein presented for regist...
Tag this Judgment!S.Madheswaran. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce the detenu, namely, S.Madheswaran, s/o.Sengodan, confined as life convict with CT.No.332, in Central Prison, Coimbatore, before this Court and set him at liberty.O R D E RP.DEVADASS, J.,1. The petitioner, a lifer, lodged in Central Prison, Coimbatore, seeks his release from jail as he was a 'juvenile in conflict with law' at the time when he has committed the offence.2. Before the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Salem, in S.C.No.9 of 2001, the petitioner was prosecuted as A6 for having killed one Vasudevan along with others on 21.08.1999, in Pullagoundampatti, in Salem District.3. On 28.02.2002, the said Judge, convicted and sentenced him as under:-Sl. No. ConvictionSentence1. U/s. 148 IPCTwo years rigorous imprisonment2. U/s. 341 IPCOne month simple imprisonment 3. U/s. 302 r/w 149 IPCLife imprisonment and fine Rs.1,000...
Tag this Judgment!Dr.S.R.V.Thangamani. Vs. R.Govindarajan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure as against the fair and decreetal orders dated 02.02.2012 passed by the learned District Munsif, Mannargudi in I.A.No.559 of2011.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 02.02.2012 passed by the learned District Munsif, Mannargudi in I.A.No.559 of2011, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. A thumb nail sketch of the germane facts, in a few broad strokes, can be encapsulated thus:(i) The revision petitioner herein happened to be the plaintiff, who presented the plaint with the following prayer:VERNACULAR (TAMIL) PORTION DELETED(extracted as such)(ii) However, it was returned for carrying out certain defects and there was a delay of 695 days in representing the plaint after complying with the defects.(iii) After hearing both sides, the court below dismissed the said application for condoning the delay in representing the plaint.(iv) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, this revision has b...
Tag this Judgment!A.Venugopal. Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu and ors.
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 first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 8.8.2011 seeking for reconveyance of land measuring 42 cents comprised in Survey No.73 situate in Alapakkam village, Chengalput Taluk, Kancheepuram District.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 representation dated 8.8.2011 seeking for reconveyance of land measuring 42 cents comprised in Survey No.73 situate in Alapakkam village, Chengalput Taluk, Kancheepuram District.2. Ms.V.M.Velumani, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.Vanchinathan, learned counsel takes notice for the third respondent. By consent the writ petition is taken up for disposal.3. The legal heir of the erstwhile owner claim reconveyance of the land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1...
Tag this Judgment!M.Kasiyammal. Vs. the Chief Executive Officer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-31-2012
Prayer: This petition has been filed seeking for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the Respondent's shop sale notice dated Nil, draw to be held on 29.03.2012, pertaining to the Petitioner's Shop No.F/A-112 measuring 300 Sq.ft. (Flower), First Floor, Koyambedu Wholesale Market Complex, Chennai and quash the same and consequently permit the Petitioner to run the flower business in the Shop No.F/A-112 measuring 300 sq.ft., of Koyambedu Wholesale Market Complex, Chennai.O R D E R1. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Petition, Mr.G.Varadharaj, Senior Estate Officer-in Charge (Koyambedu), Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Chennai, had appeared before this Court, representing the respondents. He had submitted that the name transfer regarding the Shop No.F/C-116, in the Koyambedu Whole Sale Market complex, would be done in favour of the petitioner, within a period of one week from today.2.In view of the said statement made by the said Senior Estate Of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »