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.LavanyA. Vs. the Director, Directorate of School Education
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
Writ Petitions preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to proceedings of the 1st respondent passed in No.4613 DSE/EE/P7/201 dated 07.02.2012 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to approve the admission of the petitioner in D.T.Ed course in the 4th respondent Teacher Training Institute i.e., Raak Teacher Trainaing Institute for the academic year 2011-2012.C O M M O N O R D E R1. The five petitioners were admitted in the Teacher Training Course by the 4th respondent Raak Teacher Training Institute for the academic year 2011-2012. When the names were sent for approval by the Competent Authority, viz., the Director of School Education, Puduchery informed that the 5 petitioners were not qualified for being admitted to the Diploma in Teacher Education Course. The reason given in the order was that all the 5 petitioners have scored less than 45 % and the minimum eli...
The Managing Director. Vs. Sri Bannariamman Modern Rice Mill
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
Prayer:- Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 12.7.2011 in W.P.No.8844 of 2011 on the file of this Court.JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was delivered by D. MURUGESAN, J)1. This writ appeal, at the instance of the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, is directed against the order dated 12.7.2011 allowing the writ petition filed by the first respondent.2. The first respondent was granted lease hold rights as a hulling agent by the appellant Corporation and for that purpose an agreement dated 1.7.2010 was entered into between them. Among other conditions, clause 12 of the agreement provides that, in the event the principal of the agreement has reason to believe that the agent had indulged in malpractice or had misappropriated paddy/resultant rice or gunnies, then the agreement may be terminated apart from blacklisting the mill and also recovering the value of the rice/paddy etc. Similarly, clause 24 states that the principal at his discretion ...
K.Seni. Vs. the Assistant Engineer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to collect the electricity bill charge till date from the petitioner, on petitioner representation dated 05.03.2012. (The prayer is amended as per order dated 3.7.2012 passed in M.P.No.1 of 2012)O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to collect the electricity bill charge till date from the petitioner, on petitioner representation dated 05.03.2012. (The prayer is amended as per order dated 3.7.2012 passed in M.P.No.1 of 2012)2. Mr.G.Vasudevan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. Considering the nature of order to be passed in this matter, the notice to the respondents 4 to 6 is dispensed with. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.3. The writ petition has been filed to consider the representation dated 5.3.2012 whereby the petitio...
M. Mani Alias Mani Rathinam. Vs. M. Pushpa
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order dated 13.06.2011 made in I.A. No: 222 of 2010 in F.C.O.P. No: 406 of 2009 on the file of the Family Court, Salem.O R D E R1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 13.06.2011 granting interim maintenance in I.A. No: 222 of 2010 in F.C.O.P. No: 406 of 2009 on the file of the Family Court, Salem.2. Petitioner is the husband who filed the F.C.O.P. for divorce on the ground of dessertion. Pending the Original Petition, the wife filed an interlocutory application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month and a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards litigation expenses. The Family Court, on consideration of the case partly allowed the interlocutory application by directing the husband to pay a sum of Rs. 2,500/- per month as interim maintenance from 13.04.2010 till the disposal of F.C.O.P. No: 406 of 2009 and shall also pay a su...
S.Ekambaram. Vs. the Secretary and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the first respondent relating to G.O.Ms.No.34, Housing and Urban Development Department [UD3(2)] dated 11.2.2011 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and quash the same.O R D E R1. The petitioners have come up with the above writ petition, challenging a notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.2. I have heard Mr.T.R.Rajagopalan, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, Mr.A.Navaneethakrishnan, learned Advocate General for the second respondent, Mr.M.C.Swamy learned Special Government Pleader for respondents 1,4 and 5 and Mr.R.Thiagarajan, learned Senior Counsel for the third respondent.3. The petitioners are residents of Jeevan Nagar, Thillai Ganga Nagar, Thiruvalluvar Nagar etc., which are located in the areas of Adambakkam, Alandur and Nanganallur. Facing the threat of dispossession from...
T.Jayakumar. Vs. Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable Tv Corporation Limited and ors ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
Prayer :Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus prohibiting the First and Second Respondents from in any manner acting on or approving the bids of the Respondents 3 to 6 accepted in the Tender Opening Auction for Private Local Channel Operators held on 17.05.2012 at Thiruvarur Collectorate.O R D E R1. The petitioners are Cable TV Operators. Pursuant to the tender floated by the 1st respondent Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation vide their Notification dated 30.04.2012, the petitioners also submitted their bid. As per the Re-tender-cum-Auction Notice issued by the 1st respondent Corporation relating to Tiruvarur District, even out of Thiruvarur District, separate Towns are given and the petitioner was interested in Mannargudi Town and in respect of Mannargudi, the upset price was fixed at Rs.10,400/- and the number of channels available were six.2. It is the admitted case that the petitioners went for the auction held by the Corporation a...
Ebenezar. Vs. the State Rep. by Inspector of Police,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the conviction and sentence dated 30.06.2010 made in S.C.No.80 of 2009 by the Additional Sessions Judge [Fast Track Court No.IV], Tiruppur.J U D G M E N TP.DEVADASS,J.,1. The appellant is accused in S.C.No.80 of 2010 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge [Fast Track Court No-IV], Tiruppur.2. On 30.06.2010, in the said Court, he was found guilty and sentenced as under:-Sl.No. Conviction sentence1 Under Section 323 IPC (for having caused simple hurt to P.W.1 Jayammal)6 months rigorous imprisonment.2 Under Section 323 IPC (for having caused simple hurt to P.W.2 Sheela)6 months rigorous imprisonment .3 Under Section 302 IPC (for having caused the death of Jayapaul)Life plus fine Rs.1000/-, in default 3 months rigorous imprisonment.All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:-(i) Deceased Jayapaul and Yesudass are brothers. Yesudass's son is t...
P.Arumugam. Vs. P.Kannappa Naicker and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
This Second appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated 21.02.2005 passed in A.S.No.69 of 2004 on the file of the Principal District Judge, vellore confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 19.07.2004 passed in O.S.No.46 of 1996 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Ranipet.JUDGMENT1. The present Second Appeal has been preferred by the unsuccessful plaintiff challenging the concurrent finding of both the Courts below.2. The brief facts, which led to the filing of this second appeal, are as follows:(i)The plaintiff filed a suit of partition of 'A' and 'B' schedule mentioned properties into three equal shares and to allot and deliver the possession of one such share to him, if needed, by appointing a Commissioner for the said purpose and also to pay the costs of the suit.(ii)The plaintiff pleaded that the first defendant is the eldest brother. The plaintiff, the first defendant and one (late) Ramasamy are brothers and they were li...
Pondicherry Agro Foods (P) Ltd. Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for records of the 3rd and 4th Respondents which culminated in the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent Food Corporation of India vide No.S & S2 (3) 12-13/OMSS (D) (April 2012 Tr.1) dated 23.04.2012 consequent upon empanelment No.02/02/2011-12 TN and quash the same and direct the Respondents 3 and 4 to award the tender in favour of the Petitioner.O R D E R1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking to challenge the order issued by the Food Corporation of India, dated 23.04.2012 consequent upon the empanelment made in favour of the 6th respondent and to set aside the same with a further direction to respondents 3 and 4 to award the tender in favour of the petitioner.2. It is seen from the records that the Government of India formulated Open Market Sale Scheme (Domestic) for the sale of wheat to bulk consumers through F...
Ms.Vaibhav Mercantile Ltd. Vs. the Chairman and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-2012
Writ Petition No.16920 of 2012 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to adjust the unutilized 2,31,840 units purchased during the month of March and April 2012 by the petitioner for H.T.Sc.No.1648 from the third respondent as requested by the petitioner in their representations dated 02.05.2012, 07.05.2012 and 08.06.2012.Writ Petition No.16921 of 2012 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to adjust the unutilized 1,26,990 units purchased during the month of April and May 2012 by the petitioner for H.T.Sc.No.1577 from the third respondent as requested by the petitioner in their representations dated 07.05.2012 and 08.06.2012.O R D E R1. Writ Petition No.16920 of 2012 is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to adjust the unutilized 2,31,840 units purchased during the month of Mar...
- ‹ Prev
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- Next ›
- Last »