Chennai Court July 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.
Container Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Reserve Bank of India and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to order the discharge of the petitioner's Fixed Deposit Receipts issued by the 2nd respondent and bearing No.0909401003525/2 to 0909401003525/8 totalling to an amount of Rs.6,80,76,104/- to enable the petitioner to encash the same together with interest @ 12% per annum from 14.08.2011 which is subsequent to the date of maturity till the payment.ORDER1. "AS YOU SOW, SO YOU REAP ". What will be reaped by a party, if a party commits "suppression of material facts, pleading falsehood", the decision in this case would give the result. The petitioner invested a sum of Rs.6,35,00,000/- in the fixed deposits with the second respondent bank for the period of one year. On maturity, the amounts were not released inspite of request and reminders. Therefore, the petitioner is before this court seeking mandamus to discharge of of the petitioner's fixed dep...
Jailani Basha and ors. Vs. the Chennai Metropolitan and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first and second respondents to receive, consider, process and approve the petitioners' application for demolition and reconstruction by issuing planning permission to construct residential flats in the property situated at M-Block bearing Old Nos.28 to 38, East Avenue, Periyar Nagar, Korattur Village, Chennai-600080 comprised in S.No.1231(part) without insisting on production of No Objection Certificate from the third respondent or any other authorities concerned and to accord sanction for the same in accordance with law expeditiously.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first and second respondents to receive, consider, process and approve the petitioners' application for demolition and reconstruction by issuing planning permission to construct residential flats in the property situated at M-Block bearing Old No...
N.Tamilvanan. Vs. the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
PRAYER Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 30.06.2008 passed in W.P.(MD)No.5769 of 2008 on the file of this Court.JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was delivered by G.M.AKABAR ALI, J.)1. This Writ Appeal is filed challenging the impugned order passed in W.P.(MD)No.5769 of 2008 dated 30.06.2008.2. The brief facts, necessary to dispose of the Writ Appeal is as follows: The Appellant has been appointed as a Secretary at the Nadium Primary Agricultural Cooperative Bank Ltd., on 06.04.1993. As there was an allegation of misappropriation, he was placed under suspension on 06.10.1999. A case in Crime No.4 of 1999 was also registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Crime Branch, Thanjavur against the President and two others including the Appellant of the society. A charge memo was also issued to the Appellant. Though he was placed under suspension, he was not paid any subsistence allowance. He could not take part in the disciplinary proceedings. In the ...
K. Dhanigaivel. Vs. Union of India Rep. by the Govt and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 4th respondent in respect of O.A.No.900 of 2010 dated 2.11.2011 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner to the post of Draughtsman Grade-II with effect from the date on which the 3rd respondent has been appointed with all other consequential benefits including arrears of wages, seniority, etc.O R D E R(Order of the Court was made by ELIPE DHARMA RAO, J)Aggrieved by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.900 of 2010, dated 2.11.2011, the applicant before the Tribunal, has come forward with the present writ petition.2. The facts leading to filing of the writ petition are as follows :-Petitioner is a Diploma holder in Civil Engineering and got fully qualified for the post of Draughtsman Grade-II. The second respondent had issued a notification dated 31.7.2006 callin...
Ms.A.R.S. Metals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Bo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Writ Petition No.15238 of 2012 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned demand issued by the second respondent in Lr.No.SE/CEDC/N/AAO/HT/D2059/12 dated 07.06.2012 issued to the petitioner in H.T.Sc.No.1781 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and against the Regulation 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Supply Code, 2004 and consequently direct the second respondent to adjust and refund, as contemplated under Regulation 5(5)(v) of Supply Code 2004.Writ Petition No.15239 of 2012 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned demand issued by the second respondent in Lr.No.SE/CEDC/N/AAO/HT/D2059/12 dated 07.06.2012 issued to the petitioner in H.T.Sc.No.1902 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and against the Regulation 5(5)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Na...
Pandi Alias Pandiarajan. Vs. State Represented by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
PRAYER Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., against the Judgment, dated 23.02.2005 passed in S.C.No. 399 of 2004 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Madurai.JUDGMENT1. This appeal arises out of the Judgment in S.C.No. 399 of 2005, dated 23.02.2005 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Madurai, convicting the appellant under Section 326 IPC and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and also imposed a fine of Rs.1,000/- in-default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.2. From the perusal of the records, it is seen that on 14.06.2003 at about 8.15 p.m., when the deceased viz., Sudhakaran and his brother, viz., Elumalai were returning from the house and while they were coming near VIP complex and at that time, the accused was selling plantain in a wheel cart. On seeing the accused, his brother went near the accused and at that time, the wordy quarrel had happened in be...
K.Dhanasekaran. Vs. G.V.Vanitha and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Civil revision petition filed against the order dated 10.7.2012 passed by the District Munsif, Alandur, in E.A.SR.No.9486 of 2012 in E.P.No.36 of 2002 in RCOP No.30 of 1997.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order 10.7.2012 passed by the District Munsif, Alandur, in E.A.SR.No.9486 of 2012 in E.P.No.36 of 2002 in RCOP No.30 of 1997, this civil revision petition is filed.2. Heard both sides.3. A thumbnail sketch of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this civil revision petition would run thus:The revision petitioners herein, being 3rd parties, filed the application E.A.SR.9486 of 2012 under Order 21 Rules 96 to 100 of C.P.C., seeking the following relief:"to pass an order as the above execution proceedings is not maintainable as against the petitioners both in law as well as on facts."(extracted as such)4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners herein would echo the cri de coeur of his clients to the effect that without even numbering the said application an...
Centre for Rural Education and Economic Development. Vs. Tamil Nadu El ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
PRAYER in W.P.20393/2011:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to convert the Electricity service Connections in Nos.1532 under the address The Chairman, CREED KVK, Cholamadevi, Jeyakondam from tariff 2B to tariff applicable to agricultural pumpsets.PRAYER in W.P.20394/2011:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to convert the Electricity service Connections in Nos.1533 under the address The Chairman, CREED KVK, Udaya natham, Jeyakondam from tariff 2B to tariff applicable to agricultural pumpsets.COMMON ORDER1. As the common question of law and facts is involved in these writ petitions, therefore, these writ petitions shall be disposed of by a common order.2. The Petitioner is a Non Governmental Organisation based at Chidambaram, Cuddalore District, Tamilnadu, established in the year 1987 as a Trust with an object to ...
K.Manickavelu. Vs. Rajkumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Civil revision petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 27.06.2012 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Arani, Tiruvannamalai District in E.P.No.97 of 2010 in O.S.No.89 of 2009.ORDER1. This civil revision petition is focussed by the judgment debtor against the docket order dated 27.06.2012 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Arani, Tiruvannamalai District in E.P.No.97 of 2010 in O.S.No.89 of 2009.2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner.3. A thumb nail sketch of the germane facts, absolutely necessary for the disposal of this petition at the threshold itself would run thus:The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would echo the cri de coeur of the revision petitioner/judgment debtor to the effect that the revision petitioner is an octogenarian, so to say, 81 years old and he has been paying the amounts in instalments. So far he has discharged more than Rs.one lakh and odd out of the total amount of Rs.3,00...
Chemplast Sanmar Limited. Vs. the Chairman and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent in its Lr.No.SE/CEDC/CUD/DFC/AO/R/AS/RCS/A4/F.ACCD/12 dated 18.5.2012 with respect to the petitioner's HT Service Connection No.128, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to refund the sum of Rs.44,06,402/- to the petitioner.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent in its Lr.No.SE/CEDC/CUD/DFC/AO/R/AS/RCS/A4/F.ACCD/12 dated 18.5.2012 with respect to the petitioner's HT Service Connection No.128, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to refund the sum of Rs.44,06,402/- to the petitioner.2. Heard Mr.Vijay Narayanan, learned senior counsel representing Mr.K.Harishankar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; M/s.G.Vasudevan, P.Gunaraj, S.K.Rameshwar and M.Varunkumar ...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »