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.
P. Rajasekaran Vs. the Special Officer, Nemili Co-operative Primary Ag ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records of the respondent culminating with their Form No.7 in R.R.A.No.16/2001-2002 notice dated 23.04.2012 fixing the date of auction sale of petitioner's immovable properties on 11.06.2012 and quash the same and also to direct the respondent to cancel the mortgage and return the documents of title to the petitioner.) 1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records of the respondent culminating with their Form No.7 in R.R.A.No.16/2001-2002 notice dated 23.04.2012 fixing the date of auction sale of petitioner's immovable properties on 11.06.2012 and quash the same and also to direct the respondent to cancel the mortgage and return the documents of title to the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr.C.M.Sundaravadhanam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.L.P.Shanmughasundaram, l...
Agnes Mary and Another Vs. the Chairman-cum-managing Director Indian O ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(Prayer: Prayer in W.P.No.11641/2012:Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, calling for the entire records in pursuant to the letter dated 01.04.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents 1 to 3 to settle the terminal benefits and pension benefits of her deceased son late E.Joseph Raj to the petitioner. Prayer in W.P.No.12314/2012:Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, forbearing the respondent 1 to 3 from disbursing the terminal benefits of late Mr.E.Joseph Raj bearing Roll No.25272 pursuant to the letter dated 04.05.2011 of the 2nd respondent.) COMMON ORDER 1. The petitioner in W.P.No.11641 of 2011 has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order dated 01.04.2011 of the Indian Overseas Bank, rejecting the request of petitioner for re...
C. Natarajan and Others Vs. M. Chandra and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 115 of CPC against the fair and final order of the Sub Judge, Udumalpet, Coimbatore District in E.P.No.61 of 1992 in O.S.No.17 of 1987 dated 16.02.2010.) 1. Animadverting upon the fair and final order dated 16.02.2010 passed in E.P.No.61 of 1992 in O.S.No.17 of 1987 by the learned Sub Judge, Udumalpet, Coimbatore District, this civil revision petition is focussed. 2. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of these two revisions would run thus: The respondents/decree holders filed the E.P. to execute the money decree. The E.P. was filed on 27.04.1992 for attachment of the joint property of the judgment debtors three in number and for sale. The attachment was effected. However, that attachment was not got registered and because of that, the attempt on the part of the judgment debtors to get the properties to recover the money by selling the property ended in fiasco; whereupon the same ...
J. Anandhan Vs. Union of India Rep by Its Secretary to Government Mini ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
1. The Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to challenge an order passed by the 4th respondent District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in C.C.No.79 of 2009 dated 31.01.2012. The petitioner seeks for setting aside the same and for a consequential direction to hear C.C.No.79 of 2009 in accordance with law. 2. It is stated by the petitioner that though there is a State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Puducherry, it is headless and when he wanted to move the National Commission at New Delhi, they seek for an order of the State Commission. Under the said circumstances, allegedly invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, the Writ Petition came to be filed. 3. However, the fact that the Presiding Officer is not appointed, cannot be a ground to bypass the hierarchy of appeal provided under the Act. Though the petitioner made several allegations against the District Forum, in view of the fact that this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition, t...
T. Soundarajan Vs. Valiyammal
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 24.2.2011 made in IA.No.298/2009 in OS.NO.15/2005 by the Fast Tract Court NO.2, Trichy.) ORDER 1. In this Civil Revision Petition, the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge (FTC-II) Trichy dated 24.2.2011 has been challenged by the 2nd Defendant in OS.NO.15/2005 appointing an Advocate Commissioner for the purpose of getting an expert opinion by producing the disputed documents and other documents containing the admitted signature for comparison of the signature found in the disputed documents. 2. The facts very briefly are:- a. The Respondents 2 to 8 have instituted a suit in OS.NO.87/1994 on the file of the Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli which has been transferred and renumbered as OS.No.15/2005 on the file of Fast Tract Court No.2, Tiruchirappalli for partition of the suit properties into two equal shares and allot one such share to the Plaintiffs and for separate possession and also for rendition of a...
G. Thiagarajan Vs. A. Annadurai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. against the Judgment of acquittal dated 18.12.2007 made in C.C.No.178 of 2007 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Erode.) 1. This appeal arises out of the Judgment of acquittal dated 18.12.2007 made in C.C.No.178 of 2007 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Erode. 2. The appellant as a complainant preferred a private complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act stating that he is doing Grocery business under the name and style of “Angalamman Maligai Stores” at Dharmapuri Main road, New bus stand, Mecheri Post in Salem District. The accused is employed at Coimbatore and the complainant is known to him for the past several years. On 14.01.2006, the accused borrowed a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- for his urgent expenses from the complainant promising to pay the same within 6 months. To discharge the same, he issued two post dated cheques bearing No.253575 for a sum of Rs.25,000/- drawn on C...
M/S.Surana Corporation Limited, Represented by Its Executive Director ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(PRAYER in Crl.R.C.No.683 of 2012:Criminal Revision is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crl.M.P.No.3767 of 2012 on the file of the Principal Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Chennai and set-aside the order dated 04.07.2012 passed therein and consequently direct the respondent to remove the seal of the safety lockers in the office of the petitioner situated at New No.161, Old No.79, N.S.C.Bose Road, Sowcarpet, Chennai - 600 079 and to return the keys thereof (78 Nos).PRAYER in Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2012:Criminal Revision is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crl.M.P.No.3861 of 2012 on the file of the Principal Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Chennai and set-aside the order dated 04.07.2012 passed therein and consequently to direct the respondent to release the passport and the personal bank accounts and cash of Rs.5,50,000/- and Rs.2,33,72,200/- more fully described in the schedule hereunder.) COMMON ORDER The...
A. Dalit Manivannan Vs. Inspector of Police, (Law and Order) and Anoth ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(Prayer: This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent pertaining to the impugned order dated 6.6.2012, quash the said order and to direct the first respondent to permit the petitioner and his Thai Man Makkal Iyakkam to conduct demonstration in front of the Sona College of Technology, Salem in a peaceful manner on the day that may be fixed.) 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to challenge an order of the first respondent, i.e., Inspector of Police, Sooramangalam Police Station, Salem, dated 6.6.2012 and after setting aside the same, seeks for a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner and his Thai Man Makkal Iyakkam to conduct demonstration in front of the Sona College of Technology, Salem in a peaceful manner on the day that may be fixed by this court. 2. When the matter came up on 27.07.2012, this court ordered ...
A. Manivannan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Secretary to Governm ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the third respondent in O.Mu.No.1493/Aaa 3/06 dated 5/1/2007 and quash the same and direct the third respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Watchman with all consequential benefits from the date of appointment.) ORDER 1. The petitioner was appointed as a watchman in the fourth respondent Higher Secondary School, an aided School covered by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 on 11/6/2004. He was appointed against the vacancy that arose due to the retirement of one Thiru. Ramasamy. 2. The School sent proposals on 28/3/2005 for approval of the appointment of the petitioner as Watchman. But the third respondent returned the proposal in the impugned order dated 5/1/2007 on the ground that filling up of the vacancies relating to non-teaching staff in ...
R. Radhakrishnan and Others Vs. the Secretary to Government of Tamilna ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-01-2012
(Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Declaration, declaring that the entire Acquistion Proceedings in pursuance of the Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act made in GO No.570 Housing and Urban Development dated 24.7.1984 and the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act made in GO No.351 Housing and Urban Development dated 4.3.1986 in so far as the petitioner lands are concerned in TS No.16/1 measuring 1 Ground 1306 sq. ft. in Block No.38, Puliyur Village, Egmore-Nungambakkam Taluk, Chennai District together with right of way over the 30 feet wide common private road leading to Akbarabad First Street, Kodambakkam, Chennai-24 as having lapsed by efflux of time by virtue of Section 11-A of the Land Acquisition Act and and consequently set aside the Award No.2/98 dated 10.09.1998 insofar as the petitioners' land mentioned above are concerned.) ORDER 1. The petitioner has appro...
- ‹ Prev
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 42
- 43
- Next ›
- Last »