Chennai Court September 2012 Judgments
The Sub Registrar Office of the Sub Registrar Athur, Salem District Vs ...
Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
(This petition is preferred by the petitioner, praying to set aside the order of District Forum in CMP No.121/2011 in CC.10/2011 dt.27.07.2011. This petition coming before us for hearing finally today. Upon hearing the arguments of the counsel for appellant, this commission made the following order.) JUSTICE R. REGUPATHI J, PRESIDENT. (Open court) 1. The opposite party, in CC.No.10/2011 is the Revision Petitioner herein. 2. Before the District Forum, pending enquiry of the complaint, the opposite party filed a petition, requesting to receive certain documents as additional documents, in support of the case, in order to establish that, steps were taken for the field work, as well as intimation were sent for the appearance of complainant/ Respondent to assess the same, and the same was objected by the complainant/ respondent, on the ground that those documents belatedly concocted for the purpose of enquiry, and thereby requested to dismiss the petition. 3. The District Forum, after consi...
Tag this Judgment!K. Vediappan Vs. the Secretary to Government, Home Department Chennai ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
(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 relating to History Sheet in H.S.No.516/D, dated 02.04.2009 on the file of the 4th respondent and quash the same and to direct the respondents to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to him.) 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to challenge an action of the respondents in opening a History sheet in his name in H.S.No.516/D, dated 02.04.2009 on the file of the 4th respondent, i.e., the Inspector of Police, Harur Police Station, Dharmapuri District and after setting aside the same seeks for a direction to pay compensation of Rs.5 lakhs to the petitioner. 2. When the writ petition came up on 16.7.2012, this court ordered notice on admission and had directed the learned Special Government Pleader to get instructions from the respondents. Accordingly, a counter affidavit, dated 31.7.2012 has been filed ...
Tag this Judgment!Sekar @ Chandrasekaran Vs. Kamalaveni and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, as against the Fair and Decretal order passed in I.A.No.108 of 2009 in O.S.No.370 of 2005 dated 18.08.2009 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Mayiladuthurai.) The Petitioner/Plaintiff has focussed the present Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 18.08.2009 in I.A.No.108 of 2009 in O.S.No.370 of 2005 passed by the Principal District Munsif, Mayiladuthurai. 2. The trial Court viz., the Principal District Munsif, Mayiladuthurai, while passing the orders in I.A.No.108 of 2009 in O.S.No.370 of 2005 on 18.08.2009, has, among other things, observed that 'The contention by the Respondents that this Court becomes 'functus officio' is acceptable. The petitioner claimed that M.P.No.1/2007 in S.A.No.552/2007 filed to suspend the decree and judgment was dismissed. This alone could not be a ground seeking the relief of police protection before this Court. The petitioner also did not make out a case warra...
Tag this Judgment!Mohamed Saud Vs. the Chief Secretary to Government, Government of Tami ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
(PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents 3 and 4 to invoke the Escheat Act to declare the land situate at Thiruvanmiyur Village, Chennai comprised in Survey No.68/1, 68/3, 68/4 and 69/1 admeasuring 0.38 acres, 1.49 acres, 0.43 acres and 1.81 acres altogether 4.04 acres as Government land.) THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J. This writ petition by way of public interest litigation has been filed seeking a mandamus directing respondents 3 and 4 to invoke the Escheat Act to declare the land situate at Thiruvanmiyur Village, Chennai comprised in Survey Nos.68/1, 68/3, 68/4 and 69/1 admeasuring 0.38 acres, 1.49 acres, 0.43 acres and 1.81 acres respectively, altogether 4.04 acres, as Government land. 2. The petitioner is a practising Advocate and is a resident of Vettuvankeni Village. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid land, which is situated in the prime location of t...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Indira and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
(Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Order made in M.C.O.P. No.1008 of 2002 dated 12.09.2006 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional Sub Court), Cuddalore.) R.BANUMATHI, J. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation of Rs.11,45,000/- awarded for the death of Jothi in a road traffic accident on 24.09.1999, the Appellant-Insurance Company has preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts are that on 24.9.1999 at about 6.50 P.M., deceased Jothi was walking on his extreme left side of Muthukrishnapuram main road from east to west. At that time, the bus bearing registration No.TN-49 B 1955 owned by 6th Respondent and insured with the Appellant-Insurance Company proceeding from west to east driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner without making any horn or light sign and hit against the deceased. Due to the impact, Jothi sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, after the accident Jothi was taken to Government...
Tag this Judgment!Rajalakshmi Rep. by Her Power Agent V.Ramadas, S/O.S.Venkatachala Muda ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the Learned District Munsif, Thiruthuraipoondi to dispose off the suit O.S.No.9 of 2007 pending on its file within a specified date as fixed by this Court.) The Petitioner/Plaintiff has projected the instant Civil Revision Petition praying for passing of an order by this Court in directing the Learned District Munsif, Thiruthuraipoondi to dispose off the suit O.S.No.9 of 2007 pending on its file within a time frame, to be determined by this Court. 2. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner/Plaintiff has filed O.S.No.9 of 2007 on the file of Learned District Munsif, Thiruthuraipoondi praying for the relief of permanent injunction restraining the Respondent/Defendant, his men, agents and employees from any way destroying or encroaching upon the suit property and not to harvest the horse gram crop. 3. In view of the limited prayer sought for in the present Civil Revision Petition in regard to the di...
Tag this Judgment!K.Chandran Vs. V.Geethalakshmi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
R.SUBBIAH, J. This is an application filed by defendants 1 to 3 and 12 to reject the plaint in the present suit. 2. Respondent is the plaintiff and she filed the suit as against the defendants numbering 12 for the following reliefs; "(a) to declare the plaintiff as the absolute owner of the suit schedule property; (b) to direct defendants 1 to 3 to surrender vacant possession of the suit property; (c) to declare the sale deed executed by late Mrs.Dhanalakshmi, Nirmala (D4) and late Purushothaman in favour of K.Chandran (D1) registered as Doc.No.1305 of 1985 dated 06.05.1985 on the file of SRO., Saidapet, Chennai-15 as null and void and unenforceable; (d) to declare the sale deed executed by late Mrs.Dhanalakshmi, Nirmala (D4) and late Purushothaman in favour of Meena (D2) registered as Doc.No.1303 of 1985 dated 06.05.1985 on the file of SRO., Saidapet, Chennai-15 as null and void and unenforceable; (e) to declare the sale deed executed by late Mrs.Dhanalakshmi, Nirmala (D4) and late Pu...
Tag this Judgment!Mary Shanthi and Others Vs. the Assistant Commissioner Hindu Religious ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
(Prayer:- This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the order dated 30.6.2005 made in MCOP.No.1157/2003 by the learned District Judge (MACT) Tiruvannamalai.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the order dated 30.6.2005 made in MCOP.No.1157/2003 by the learned District Judge (MACT) Tiruvannamalai, dismissing the claim petition on the ground that the claimants failed to prove that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. 2. The Appellants/ claimants, who are the legal representatives of the deceased Velankanni, who died in the motor accident that had occurred on 13.7.2003 at about 5 p.m., have filed the claim petition against the the Respondent/the Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tiruvannamalai, claiming a compensation of Rs.5 lakhs. According to the claimants, on 13.7.2003 at about 5.00 p.m. the deceased and two others were proceeding in a Hero Honda Motorcycl...
Tag this Judgment!Duraisamy Kachirayar and Others Vs. Sengoda Gounder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
(This second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 24.02.2005 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Fast Track Court, Kallakurichi in A.S.No.64 of 2004 in confirming the judgment and decree dated 21.08.2001 passed by the learned II Additional District Munsif, Kallakurichi in O.S.No.627 of 1997.) This second appeal is focussed by the unsuccessful plaintiffs animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 24.02.2005 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Fast Track Court, Kallakurichi in A.S.No.64 of 2004 in confirming the judgment and decree dated 21.08.2001 passed by the learned II Additional District Munsif, Kallakurichi in O.S.No.627 of 1997. 2. The parties, for convenience sake, are referred to here under according to their litigative status before the trial Court. 3. Heard both sides. 4. Niggard and bereft of unnecessary details, the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this second appeal would ...
Tag this Judgment!Kavikumar Spinning Mills Pvt.Ltd. Venkasapuram, Coimbatore Through Its ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-18-2012
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C praying to set aside the order of conviction and sentence rendered by the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Sattur in C.C.No.145 of 2001 dated 04.08.2004 confirmed by the Principal Sessions Court, Srivilliputhur in C.A.No.128 of 2004 dated 07.04.2006.) 1. Challenge in this Criminal Revision Case is against the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.145 of 2001 by the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Sattur, modified in Criminal Appeal No.128 of 2004 by the Principal District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur. 2. The respondent herein as complainant has filed the complaint in question under section 138 r/w 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 wherein the present revision petitioners and others have been shown as accused. 3. The averments made in the complaint may be stated like thus: The complainant is a sole proprietorship through its proprietor viz. P.Arumugasamy. The complainant is a dealer ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »