Chennai Court January 2013 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.
Razik Naina Mohamed, Vs. State, Through
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:07. 01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU Criminal Appeal (MD) No.4 of 2012 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012 Razik Naina Mohamed, S/o.Mohamed Kasim ... Appellant/ Accused vs. State, through The Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. (Cr.No.96/2009) ... Respondent/ Complainant Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 07.09.2011, in S.C.No.175 of 2010 on the file of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ramanathapuram. !For Appellant ... Mr.M.Daniel Manoharan ^For Respondent ... Mr.K.S.Duraipandian, Addl.Public prosecutor. :JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.NAGAMUTHU,J) Challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant in S.C.No.175/2010 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Cour...
R.Dhanabalan Vs. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated:- 07.01.2013 Coram:- The Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.RAJA Writ Petition No.8187 of 2002 R.Dhanabalan ... Petitioner vs.1. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, through Chairman cum Managing Director.2. Director, Planning & Projects, Neyveli Lignite Corpn, Ltd, 3. J.L.Mehta, Director (Planning & Projects), Respondents 1 to 3 having office at Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, Corporation Office, Block 1, Neyveli. ... Respondents Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus as stated therein. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Singaravelan For Respondents : Mr.N.A.K.Sarma The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the order in Memo not D (P&P) C 21/SM/2002, dt.14.02.2002, passed by the 2nd respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the respond...
Saraswathy Vs. Babu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :07. 01.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU Contempt Petition No.1807 of 2011 Saraswathy .. Petitioner Vs. Babu .. Respondent This contempt petition is preferred under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for wantonly and repeatedly disobeying the order of this court passed in contempt petition No.958 of 2011 in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2011 in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2010 in Crl.R.C.No.1321 of 2010 dated 21.7.2011. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Maniyapparaj For Respondent : Mr.P.Rathinavel - - - - ORDER This contempt petition arose for the alleged disobedience of the order passed by this court in Contempt Petition No.958 of 2011 in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2011 in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2010 in Crl.R.C.No.1321 of 2010, dated 21.7.2011. 2.When the contempt petition came up on 25.11.2011, this court directed notice to the respondent. Subsequently, the respondent entered appearance and has filed a counter affidavit, dated 23.11.2012. Th...
J.Senguttuvan Vs. Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 07 01.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN W.P.No.30095A of 2002 J.Senguttuvan .. Petitioner vs. The Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Rep. by its General Manager (Administration), 42, Thambuswamy Road, Chennai 10. .. Respondent Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings Rc.not E10/1726/2002-(1) dated 21.5.2002 of the respondent herein and quash the same. For Petitioner ... Mr.S.Venkataraman For Respondent ... Mr.V.Perumal ORDER Today, when this writ petition was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner has sought permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition. He has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2.In view of the submission and the endorsement made in the writ petition, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connect...
P.Samsingh Vs. 1.P.Balasundari Ammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:07/01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2688 of 2012 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012 and C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2689 of 2012 P.Samsingh .. Petitioner in both the CRPs. Vs 1.P.Balasundari Ammal 2.G.Yogavathi 3.D.Divyan Chakaravarthy 4.D.Deepika Chakaravarthy 5.P.Rajasingh 6.P.Prabusingh 7.P.Padmeshwari 8.S.Dellieshwari 9.P.Kumaravelsingh 10.P.Anbusingh .. Respondents in both the CRPs. C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2688 of 2012 filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.27 of 2012 in O.S.No.11 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / Additional District Judge, Tuticorin, dated 02.08.2012. C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2689 of 2012 filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.60 of 2012 in O.S.No.11 of 2011 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Tuticorin, dated 28.11.2012. !For petitioner .....
S.Kisver Begum Vs. G.Naushad
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:07. 01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.26 of 2013 S.Kisver Begum .. Petitioner Vs G.Naushad .. Respondent Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for expeditious disposal of G.W.O.P.No.34 of 2008 on the file of the learned I Additional District Court, Madurai. !For petitioner ... Mr.Y.Krishnan ^ :ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner who would echo the heart-burns of his client to the effect that the petitioner filed G.W.O.P. No.34 of 2008 seeking custody of his minor daughter and the matter has been pending ever since 2008 without any significant progress. The learned counsel for the petitioner would also submit that now there is no regular Judge in the Mahila Court and only the Additional District Judge is in-charge of that Court and the said Judge is not dealing with the matter. 2.Be that as it may, I would like to direct the learned Judge, either the reg...
A.Ajaz Ahmed Vs. Norespt
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
A.No.5285 of 2012 in C.S.No.787 of 2012, A.Nos.5200, 4868, 5034 & 4730 of 2012 in C.S.No.696 of 2012 VINOD K. SHARMA,J., Mr.A.Ajaz Ahmed filed C.S.No.787 of 2012 under Order XLII Rules 1, 2 and 3 of the O.S.Rules r/w Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for recovery of Rs.11,34,137/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Thirty Four Thousand One Hundred and Thirty Seven only) together with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. since the filing of suit till realization.2. The applicant / plaintiff also prayed for arrest of the defendant vessel M.T.Pratibha Warna in as is where is condition, which was in the Indian Waters at the port of Chennai, and for sale of the vessel to satisfy the suit claim.3. Whereas Mr.N.Mohammed Saud also filed C.S.No.696 of 2012 under Order XLII Rules 1, 2 and 3 of the O.S.Rules r/w Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recovery of Rs.11,24,543.17 (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Twenty Four Thousand Five Hundred Forty Three and Paise Seventeen only) along with in...
Azhinjilan Vs. Visalakshi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :07. 01.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR S.A.No.1206 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 Azhinjilan .. Appellant -Vs- Visalakshi .. Respondent Second Appeal filed under section 100 of C.P.C against the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2009 made in A.S.No.19 of 2007 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Tindivanam, reversing the judgment and decree dated 09.01.2007 made in O.S.No.528 of 2004 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam. For appellant : Mrs.N.Mala For Respondent : Mr.N.Suresh ----- JUDGMENT The plaintiff in the original suit is the appellant in the second appeal. He filed the suit O.S.No.528 of 2004 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam for the relief of declaration and injunction. The learned trial Judge, after trial, decreed the suit granting the relief of declaration and permanent injunction without costs by a judgment and decree dated ...
S.Ganesa Vs. State
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:07. 01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL CRL.RC(MD)No.2 of 2013 S.Ganesan .. Petitioner/Accused No.11 Vs State Represented by the Inspector of Police, Tirunelveli Taluk Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.205/2006) .. Respondent/Complainant Prayer Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records of the Learned Judicial Magistrate not III, Tirunelveli in C.C.No.27 of 2007 dated 28.04.2008 and set aside the Judgment of the 'Benefit of Doubt' acquittal and Honorary Acquit the Petitioner. !For Petitioner... Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran ^For Respondent... Mr.P.Kandasamy Government Advocate (Crl.Side) :ORDER The Petitioner/Accused No.11 has preferred the instant Criminal Revision Petition as against the Judgment dated 28.04.2008 in C.C.No.27 of 2007 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate not III, Tirunelveli.2. The Learned Judicial Magistrate not...
Periyasamy Vs. K.P.Thangaraj
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:07. 01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.1641 of 2012 and M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2012 Periyasamy .. Petitioner Vs K.P.Thangaraj .. Respondent Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 11.07.2012 passed in I.A.No.248 of 2012 in O.S.No.512 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Sub-Court, Karur. !For petitioner ... Mr.D.Nallathambi ^For respondent ... Mr.G.R.Swaminathan :ORDER Heard both the sides. From the facts and figures as well as from the submissions made on both sides, it reveals that the trial in the original suit is pending. The plaintiff closed his side after adducing evidence. Now the chief examination affidavit has been filed. However, no list of witnesses filed on the defendant's side and in such circumstances, I.A., was filed under Order 18 Rule 17 praying the Court to mandate that the witnesses on the defendant's side are all to be pro...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »