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.
P.K.Jayaseelan. Vs. the District Collector, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
PRAYER IN W.P.No.6002 & 6003 of 2012Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the impugned order passed by the second respondent vide No.NAKA2791/DC/AKE/2011, dated 27.02.2012.PRAYER IN W.P.No.7016 & 7017 of 2012Writ petition is 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 consider the petitioners representation dated 04.11.2011, 13.12.2011 also Na.Ka.2791/DC/mf,/2011 dated 02/2012 issued by the Additional Principal Educational Officer and appoint the petitioners as the Principal Educational committee, Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Odagathur instead of Odagathur Elementary School.COMMON ORDER1. This order shall dispose of the following writ petitions as the common question of law and facts are involved in all these writ petitions.SL.No. W.P.No.Name of the petitioner1 ...
V.Mani. Vs. Tamil Nadu Handloom Weavers Co-operative Society Limited.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Civil revision petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18/1960 as amended by Act 23/1973 as against the judgment and decree dated 16.08.2005 passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, (Rent Control Appellate Authority), Villupuram in R.C.A.No.4 of 2004 reversing the order and decree dated 23.07.2004 in RCOP No.1 of 2003 passed by the learned Principal District Munsif (Rent Controller), Thirukovilur.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 16.08.2005 passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, (Rent Control Appellate Authority), Villupuram in R.C.A.No.4 of 2004 in reversing the order and decree dated 23.07.2004 in RCOP No.1 of 2003 passed by the learned Principal District Munsif (Rent Controller), Thirukovilur, civil revision petition is focussed by the landlord.2. A thumbnail sketch absolutely necessary for the disposal of this civil revision petition would run thus:(i) The revision petitioner/landlord file...
Smt.S.Rajalini. Vs. T.indran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Civil revision petitions preferred seeking a direction to the Principal Family Court, Chennai, to dispose of the E.P.No.16 of 2012 in I.A.No.2098 of 2010 in H.M.O.P.No.2636 of 2010 and H.M.O.P.No.2651 of 2010, respectively, expeditiously.COMMON ORDER1. The above civil revision petitions are filed to direct the Principal Family Court, Chennai, to dispose of the E.P.No.16 of 2012 in I.A.No.2098 of 2010 in H.M.O.P.No.2636 of 2010 and H.M.O.P.No.2651 of 2010, respectively, within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners would echo the cri de couer of his clients to the effect that the first petitioner in both the revisions filed the H.M.O.P.No.2651 of 2010 seeking divorce. Similarly, the respondent herein/the husband also filed one other H.M.O.P.2636 of 2010 seeking divorce, in which, I.A.No.2098 of 2010 was filed by the revision petitioner herein/wife seeking maintenance, which was ordered. However, the respondent herein/husband was not ...
V.R.Maragatham. Vs. the Commissioner, and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents, their men and agents from interfering with the lands measuring 9.90 acres in S.F.No.109, Vadavalli village, Coimbatore for which ryotwari patta No.18 was granted to the petitioner on 30.09.1968 under the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963.ORDER1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the respondents from interfering with the lands measuring 9.90 acres in S.No.109, Vadavalli Village, Coimbatore for which ryotwari patta No.18 was granted to the petitioner on 30.09.1968 under the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963.2. When this writ petition came up on 26.4.2012, this court ordered notice on admission and directed Mr.S.Kandasamy, learned Special Government Pleader for the HR&CE Department to take notice. On taking notice, the ...
The Chief Educational Officer. Vs. the Correspondent and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
PrayerWrit Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the Order dated 17.2.2009 made in W.P.No.1284 of 2009 on the file of this Court.JUDGMENT R.BANUMATHI,J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 17.2.2009 in W.P.No.1284 of 2009 quashing the impugned proceedings of District Educational Officer in O.Mu.No.4626/A 2/06 dated 13.1.2009 and directing the appellants to approve the appointment of Gipson Sam as Record Clerk with effect from 1.6.2004 with all attendant benefits, appellants have preferred this appeal.2. G.Selvaraj, who was working as Record Clerk in the respondent School, retired on 31.3.2003. In the vacancy arose out of the said retirement, respondent school appointed Gipson Sam as Record Clerk with effect from 1.6.2004. Respondent sent proposal to the 2nd appellant - District Educational Officer, Thuckalay to approve the appointment of Gipson Sam. The proposal was returned by 2nd appellant by impugned proceedings in O.Mu.No.4626 A2/06, dated 13.1.2009 stating tha...
theertha Gounder. Vs. Andi and ors
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division at Kallakurichi dated 21.4.1999 in A.S.No.14 of 1997, reversing the judgment and decree passed by the I Additional District Munsif Court at Kallakuruchi made in O.S.No.861 of 1990 dated 3.1.1997.J U D G M E N T1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court in A.S.No.14 of 1997 dated 21.4.1999 in reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court made in O.S.No.861 of 1990 dated 3.1.1983 in dismissing the suit. 2. The appellant herein was the first defendant and the respondents 1 to 3 were the plaintiffs. The respondents 4 to 7 were the defendants 2 to 5 in the suit before the trial Court. For convenience, the rank of the parties before the trial court are maintained, infra. 3. The case of the plaintiffs before the trial court in the plaint would be as follows: a. The plaintiffs are broth...
K.N.Chinnappan. Vs. L.Bhavani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as against the order dated 30.08.2011 made in I.A.No.110 of 2011 in O.S.No.96 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Ponneri.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 30.08.2011 passed in I.A.No.110 of 2011 in O.S.No.96 of 2010 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Ponneri, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. A thumbnail sketch of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this revision would run thus:The revision petitioner herein filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The written statement was filed by the respondent. Before the commencement of trial, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.110 of 2011 with the following prayer:"To permit the petitioner/plaintiff to mark the documents Exs.P1 to P.17"3. After hearing both sides, the lower Court passed the order, the operative portion of it, would run thus:"Having gone through the affidavit, it is discernible that in or...
Mrs.T.AnuradhA. Vs. the Chairman and Managing Director
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Prayer: This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records of 2nd Respondent relating to the letter dated Nil in Lr.Ref.No.AE/TN/Central-222-050-2 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to restore Service Connection No.222-050-2 stands in the name of the petitioner without insisting any payment.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 had submitted that the impugned proceedings of the second respondent may be set aside, in view of the fact that the details and the procedures followed in arriving at a sum of Rs.52,770/-, payable by the petitioner, had not been shown in the said impugned proceedings. He had further submitted that the second respondent may be permitted to issue fresh...
K.Rajam. Vs. K.P.Ganesan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 24.2.2012 passed by the I Additional District Munsif, Erode, in I.A.No.379 of 2011 in O.S.No.680 of 2006.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 24.2.2012 passed by the I Additional District Munsif, Erode, in I.A.No.379 of 2011 in O.S.No.680 of 2006, this civil revision petition is filed.2. A thumbnail sketch of the germane facts, which are absolute necessary for the disposal of this civil revision petition would run thus:(i) The revision petitioner herein/plaintiff filed the suit for injunction and it was decreed ex-parte. Thereafter E.P. also was filed to enforce the injunction. On receipt of the E.P. notice, the respondent herein/defendant participated in the proceedings and thereafter, filed the I.A.No.379 of 2011 to get the delay of 1515 days condoned in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C.to get the ex-parte decree set aside.(ii) After hearing both sides, the lower Court condoned the delay subject to p...
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. R.Gopalakrishnan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
PRAYER:- Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 09.06.2004 made in MACTOP No.1364 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.IV), Tirupur.J U D G M E N T1. In this appeal, the Transport Corporation disputes the negligence question and also the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the tempo van driver has also contributed to the accident. Further, the rate of disability and the quantum of compensation awarded are on the higher side.3. However, the learned counsel for the first respondent/claimant would contend that there was no evidence on the side of the appellant. It is a case of complete amputation of leg. In fact, what was awarded is less.4. On 04.09.1998, in the early morning, when the tempo van came driven by the second respondent, the Corporation bus came driven from the opposite side dashed against the van and in this, the second respondent sust...
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »