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.
S.i. Thomas and ors. Vs. Balaraman and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Civil Revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order in I.A. No: 3302 of 2012 in O.S. No: 1269 of 2012 on the file of the IV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 26.04.2012.O R D E R1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against an order dated 26.04.2012 of the learned IV th Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, made in I.A. No: 3302 of 2012 in O.S. No: 1269 of 2012. The revision petitioners are the plaintiffs in the suit and they filed a suit for declaration namely,a. For declaration declaring the sale deed bearing Doc.No.1263 of 1980 dated 29.04.1980 registered in the office of SRO, Saidapet, executed by 1st defendant in favour of 12th & 13th defendants in respect of "C" Schedule property as null and void.b. For declaration declaring the sale deed bearing Doc.No.2492 of 1980 dated 31.07.1980 registered in the office of SRO, Saidapet, executed by Singaram in favour of 11th defendant in respect of "B" Schedule propert...
Sri Padmavathi Modern Rice Mill and ors. Vs. the Government of Puduche ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent in G.O.38 dated 27.03.2012 and to quash the same as illegal, incompetent, without jurisdiction and unconstitutional.O R D E R1. The petitioners, who are rice mill owners, have invoked the writ jurisdiction with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the notification issued vide G.O.38 dated 27.03.2012, being illegal, incompetent, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction.2. The Director, Department of Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Puducherry, entered into a statutory contract with the Millers for procurement of single boiled rice under Clause-3 of Puducherry Paddy and Rice Procurement (levy) Order 1996.3. The petitioners, under the contract, undertook to sell singled boiled rice to the Government at the rate acceptable to both the parties. The petitioners agreed to sup...
B. Iyamperumal. Vs. the Director of Rural Development and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.7606 of 2006Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of writ of certiorari to call for the records of the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.39076/2004/C5 dated 9/3/2006 issued by the first respondent and quash the same.Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.9434 of 2006Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of writ of certiorari to call for the records of the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.14/31663/2004 dated 20/8/2009 passed by the second respondent and quash the same.COMMON ORDER1. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant in Divisional Development Office, Karur through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in Karur District on 14/6/1985. On his request, he was transferred to Thoothukudi District and joined on 5/6/1987.2. The third respondent was appointed as Typist at Kadaladi Block in Ramnad District on 17/4/1985. She was transferred to Thoothukudi District on request and joined duty as Ty...
S.Kannan. Vs. the Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
PRAYER Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 22.11.2011 made in W.P.(MD)No.3683 of 2009 on the file of this Court.JUDGMENTR.BANUMATHI,J1. This appeal arises out of the order dismissing W.P.(MD) No.3683 of 2009 (22.11.2011) whereby the Writ Court declined to quash levy, demand and collection of vacant land tax as condition precedent for grant of sub division and also approval of building plan.2. Writ Petitioner owns a plot measuring 239.09 Square Meter in Town Survey No.25/4 (Part) and 26/2A (Part) in Ward No."J" Block, No.5, Nagercoil Municipal Limits. On 16.07.2007, Appellant submitted an application to Nagercoil Municipality seeking approval of sub division of the plot. Nagercoil Local Planning Authority has given planning permission to the Appellant in Roc.No.664/2007/N.L.P.A. dated 27.09.2007 and the same was forwarded to the Respondent Municipality.3. Grievance of the Appellant is that for approval of sub division of the plot, Respondent Munic...
Selvamani and ors. Vs. the Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Prayer:(in all Crl.O.Ps) Petitions are filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, praying to direct the third respondent to conduct further investigation and to file further report in Crime No.247 of 2009 and to examine all the affected persons and collect the documents and evidences and to direct the third respondent to file the same in the case in C.C.No.345 of 2012 pending on the file of the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.C O M M O N O R D E R1. With the petitioners in all the criminal original petitions are seeking the same relief against the respondents and the case in C.C.B X Crime No.247 of 2009 seems to have been registered under Section 420 I.P.C., on 14.06.2009, based on the complaint lodged by one Mr.S.Ramesh on behalf all the aggrieved persons, including the petitioners herein and the respondents in all the petitions are one and the same all the petitions have been clubbed together, heard and disposed of in this common order.2. The facts germane for the disposal...
H.H.Karthika Thirunal Lakshmi Bayi. Vs. Sarath Kakumanu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the learned Judge XIV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai to take up the I.A.S.R.No.4087 of 2012 on file before proceeding with the enquiry in O.S.No.3149 of 2008.O R D E R1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed for a direction to the learned XIV Assistant City Civil Judge to take up the I.A.S.R.No.4087 of 2012 on file before proceeding with the enquiry in O.S.No.3149 of 2008.2. It is the case of the revision petitioners that they are plaintiffs in the suit filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any manner interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property at No.1 Lattice Bridge Road, Adyar, Chennai-20 along with the suit. The respondents/defendants 1, 6 and 7 have filed a written statement. While so, the respondents/defendants 1, 6 and 7 filed a petition in I.A.No.19064 of 2011 under Order VIII Rule 1-A(3) read with Section 151 C.P.C. praying...
R.Duraisamy. Vs. Ramasamy Gounder and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 15.2.2012 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Coimbatore, in IA.No.696 of 2011 in Cross Appeal CFR No.1614 of 2011 in A.S.No.33 of 2007.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the order dated 15.2.2012 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Coimbatore, in I.A.No.696 of 2011 in Cross Appeal CFR No.1614 of 2011 in A.S.No.33 of 2007, this civil revision petition is filed.2. A thumbnail sketch of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this revision petition would run thus:(i) A.S.No.33 of 2007 was filed by the revision petitioners herein, which is pending before the Additional District and Sessions Judge(FTC-II) Coimbatore. During the pendency of the said A.S., the cross-appeal was presented by the respondents herein with an application in I.A.No.696 of 2011 to get the delay of 1546 days condoned in filing the said cross-appeal.(ii) After hearing...
S.Saleth Mary. Vs. the Director of Elementary Education and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
PRAYER Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the third respondent in A.Thi.Mu.No.2047/A1/11 dated .09.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to sanction second incentive increment to the petitioner for M.A. Degree.ORDER1. The petitioner was appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher with B.A., B.Ed., qualification during February 1992.2. While the petitioner was serving as a Secondary Grade Teacher, she passed M.Ed., during 1999. Thereafter, she passed M.A in May 2001.3. The petitioner was granted incentive increment for M.Ed., during June 2001. However, the third respondent cancelled the incentive increment and ordered for recovery by an order, dated 04.11.2005. The reason for cancellation was that M.Ed Degree was not the essential qualification for the grant of incentive increment. The petitioner has filed a Writ Petition in W...
The Managing Director. Vs. A.Williams
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
PRAYER:- Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 01.12.2004 made in M.C.O.P. No.58 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate), Coimbatore.J U D G M E N T1. The Transport Corporation disputes quantum of compensation awarded to the claimants for the death of their son.2. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the deceased was a non-earning member and in such a case, the Tribunal adopted Rs.3,000/- per month as monthly income and adopted the multiplier 10 and awarded excessive compensation.3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the claimants would contend that the deceased lost his life at a young age. He was a very brilliant boy. He was about to finish his Diploma, but, before that his life itself was finished. Had he alive he would have been a very good support morally, economically and financially to his beloved parents. Now, everything is lost. In the circumstances, the Tribunal adopted the monthly income as a yardst...
A.Ganesan. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-2012
PRAYER Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 1st respondent in letter No.1146/D2/06-1 School Education Department, dated 25.05.2006 and the consequential order passed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.105962/ D.1(4)/2003 dated 21/08/2006 and the order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings O.Mu.No. 10144/Aa3/06 dated 13.09.2006 and quash the same and direct the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner as record clerk with all the consequential benefits from the date of appointment.ORDER1. According to the petitioner, he was appointed as Record Clerk by an order, dated 10.02.1999 in the vacancy caused due to the promotion of one Mr.Velayutham as Junior Assistant on 01.02.1997 in the fourth respondent School, which is an aided School governed by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools ...
- ‹ Prev
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- Next ›
- Last »