Chennai Court August 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.
M/S. Ankit Fasteners Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by Its Senior Manager Vs. the Assi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayers: W.P.No.13647 of 2012: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order- in-original No.15646/2011 dated 25.4.2011 of the respondent and quash the same. W.P.No.13648 of 2012: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the notice, dated 9.5.2012, in F.No.S.45/448/2002-EPCG of the respondent and quash the same.) 1. Since, the issues involved in both the writ petitions are similar in nature, they have been taken up together and a common order is being passed. 2. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. 3. The writ petition, in W.P.No.13647 of 2012, has been filed challenging the order of the respondent, dated 25.4.2011, confirming the demand of duty of Rs.22,94,284/-, said to be payable by the importer, along with the a...
Dr. M. Kaladevi W/O. N. Saravana Kumar Vs. the Directorate of Medical ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned diversion order dated 23/7/2012 in reference No.4868/P and D/2007 passed by the second respondent read with the relieving order dated 27/7/2012 in reference No.184/12 issued by the third respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to retain the petitioner in Singampunari.) ORDER 1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a Writ, in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order dated 23.07.2012 passed by the Joint Director of Medical and Rural Health Services and Family Welfare, Sivagangai, and consequential relieving order dated 27.07.2012 passed by the third respondent. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Surgeon (Dental) on recommendation of the Tami Nadu Public Service Commission on 04.05.2012. The petitioner, while working as Assistant Surgeon (Dental) at Government Hospital...
P. Rajeshwari Vs. the Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Buil ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to demolish the entire structure constructed in Block No.39 at Ashok Nagar Scheme (4 in 1), 11th Avenue, Chennai, put up by respondents 4 and 5 without permission of the competent authority.) ORDER ( The Honourable the Chief Justice and T.S. Sivagnanam ) 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to demolish the entire structure put up by the fourth and fifth respondents in Block No.39, Ashok Nagar Scheme (4 in 1), 11th Avenue, Chennai, without permission from the competent authority. 2. The petitioner alleges in the writ petition that she is the owner of flats bearing Nos.38/2 and 38/4 in 12th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Chennai-83. The 4th and 5th respondents have purchased the entire Block No.39 in Ashok Nagar Scheme and they are raising construction for the purpose of putting up a ...
Coastal Community Protection Movement, Rep.by Its Founder/President Vs ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the issuance of a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from evicting members of the petitioner Association from the Fishing Harbour Area of Kasimedu.) T.S. Sivagnanam, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a mandamus forbearing the respondents from evicting the members of the petitioner Association from the Finishing Harbour Area of Kasimedu. 2. The petitioner Association, viz., ‘Coastal Community Protection Movement’ is a registered Association consisting of fishermen of the Fishing Harbour area. It is stated that the petitioner Association and other 2,00,000 fishermen are at present using the fishing Harbour in the Greater Madras Port Area. The grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent - Chennai Port Trust, contravening the solemn assurance given by the second and third respondents to the fishermen,...
M. Ramasamy and Others Vs. S. Duraisamy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: Second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree of the Principal District Judge, Erode dated 14.11.2011 made in A.S.No.37 of 2010 confirming the Judgment and Decree of the I Additional Sub Judge, Erode dated 17.09.2009 in O.S.No.106 of 2007.) JUDGMENT 1. The arguments advanced on both sides were heard. Appeal Memorandum, copies of judgments and decrees of the courts below and the documents produced in the form of typed set papers were also perused. 2. The unsuccessful plaintiffs, who lost their legal battle in both the courts below, are the appellants in the second appeal. They had filed the suit before the trial court for the enforcement of their supposed right of preemptive purchase in respect of the share of the first respondent/first defendant in the suit property. Both the courts negatived their claim. Hence the appellants/plaintiffs are before this court in this second appeal. 3. As against the judgment of an appellate co...
M. Natarajan Vs. the Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Offi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the respondent dated 05.01.2012, File No.MAS/PC/00171/11 and quash the same.) 1. The short question arises for consideration is whether the petitioner's Passport being impounded by the Regional Passport Officer, Chennai vide order dated 05.01.2012 is liable to be interfered with by this Court? 2. The petitioner was informed by the first respondent that his Passport vide No.Z1758388, dated 16.12.2008 valid till 15.12.2018 issued by his office was impounded under Section 10(3)(d) of the Passport Act, 1967 vide the order of the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai made in C.C.No.6 of 2004, dated 26.07.2010 and the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.2417 of 2008 in C.C.No.6 of 2004 and further vide order dated 11.8.2010 passed by this court in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2010 in Crl.A.No.476 of 2010 as forwarded b...
M. Ramesh Kumar S/O. M. Mariappan Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the third respondent herein to permit the petitioner to participate in the Lateral Entry Counselling for the second year B.E.Computer Science group scheduled to be held on 07.08.2012 so as to enable the petitioner join in second year B.E. Computer Science group in any one of the Government or Government Aided or Self Financing Engineering Colleges.) ORDER 1. The petitioner completed Polytechnic Course in Computer Science in Register No.10508349 from Arasan Ganesan Polytechnic College, Sivakasi. 2. As per the Regulation of admission to B.E., course, the petitioner is eligible for admission in the second year B.E. course in the Government, Government Aided and Self-financing Engineering Colleges under the Lateral Entry Counselling. 3. The third respondent had issued advertisement in the newspaper, inviting application form for the Counselling for the admission...
K. Balasubramaniyan Vs. the Secretary to Government Home Department, C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent for National Promotion as Deputy Superintendent of Police from the date on which petitioner's juniors were earlier promoted consequently for revision in the pension with arrears therein (pension) (Prayer amended as per order, dated 19.1.2011, by MSNJ in M.P.nO.1/01 in W.P.No.16824 of 2010.) ORDER 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner had joined in service, as direct Grade-I Police Constable. Thereafter, he had been promoted to the various posts. While so, he had retired from service, as an Inspector of Police. It has been stated that, even though the petitioner was eligible and entitled to be promoted, as a Deputy Superintendent of Police, before he had attained the age of superannuation, on 31.5.2006, he had not been given ...
K. Sarangan Vs. M. Govindaraj
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the docket order dated 10.12.2009 passed in I.A.No.2888 of 2009 in I.A.No.7228 of 2007 in O.S.No.3717 of 2006 on the file of the III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) 1. The Petitioner/Defendant has filed the present Civil Revision Petition as against the docket order dated 10.12.2009 in I.A.No.2888 of 2009 in I.A.No.7228 of 2007 in O.S.No.3717 of 2006 passed by the Learned III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner/Defendant submits that the learned III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai should have seen that the Court is already seized of the matter and that the importance of an expert opinion is essential for disposal of the main suit itself. Moreover, I.A.No.7228 of 2007 has been taken on file before the enquiry in an application seeking leave to defend the suit. 3. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner/De...
B. John Pandian Vs. the Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport O ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
(Prayer: This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to renew the passport bearing file No.MASV00006811, dated 04.01.2011 as per the petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2011.) 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to the first respondent to renew his passport bearing file No.MASV00006811, dated 04.01.2011 as per his representation dated 6.9.2011. 2. When the matter came up on 22.6.2012, this court directed notice to be served on the Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the Passport Department and also on the Special Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent, i.e., the District Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District. Accordingly, on notice, the first respondent has filed a counter affidavit, dated 19.7.2012 together with typed set of papers in support of the averments found in the counter affidavit. The l...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »