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.
A.Selvi Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:28. 01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU H.C.P(MD)No.11 of 2013 A.Selvi .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. 2.The Inspector of Police, Sankarankovil Police Station (Town), Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District. 3.The Sub Inspector of Police, Sankarankovil Police Station (Town), Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District. 4.The Sub Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District. 5.Raj 6.Sakthivel 7.Kalimuthu 8.Mahesh 9.Ramathal .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to produce the body of the petitioner's daughter, namely, Miss.A.Essakkiammal, aged 19 years, now illegally detained by the respondents 5 to 9 before this Court and set her at liberty. !For petitioner ... Mr.J.C.Rathinavel Pandian ^For res...
U.R.C. Palani Ammal Matriculation Higher Secondary School Vs. State of ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :28. 01.2013 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE R.BANUMATHI and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN Writ Petition No.33058 of 2012 U.R.C. Palani Ammal Matriculation Higher Secondary School (12192) rep. by its Correspondent C.Devarajan, Sengodampalayam, Thindal, Erode-638 012. .. Petitioner vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Govt., School Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Director of Matriculation Schools, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006. 3.The Private Schools Fee Determination Committee, rep. by its Member Secretary, PTA Building, D.P.I. Campus, College Road, Chenna006. .. Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order of the 3rd Respondent made against the Petitioner school under Section 6(4) of the Act 22 of 2009 dated 27.05.2011 and set as...
State, Rep By, Vs. 1.V.Chinnathambi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:28. 01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU CRIMINAL APPEAL(MD).No.300 of 2006 and CRL.RC.[MD].No.441 of 2006 CRIMINAL APPEAL [MD].No.300 of 2006:- State, rep by, Inspector of Police, Arumuganeri Police Station, Tuticorin District. ... Appellant Vs. 1.V.Chinnathambi 2.M.Siva @ Sivanaindaperumal 3.V.Kittu @ Muthukrishnan 4.A.Velayuthakonar 5.M.Manthiram ... Respondents PRAYER Appeal is filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in S.C.No.5 of 2001 on the file of the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court not II, Tuticorin, dated 07.04.2006 and set aside the same. !For Appellant ... Mr.A.Ramar Additional Public Prosecutor ^For Respondent ... Mr.V.Kathirvelu Senior Counsel For Mr.K.Prabhu CRL.RC.[MD].No.441 of 2006:- Ramalakshmi ... Appellant ... Appellant Vs. 1.State, rep by, Inspector of Police, Arumuganeri Police Station, ...
S.Saravana Arul Vs. A.D.Senthureswaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:28. 01/2013 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA A.No.4154 of 2011 in C.S.No.144 of 2007 S. SARAVANA ARUL 5 NATESAN ST T NAGAR CHENNAI 1 VS A.D. SENTHURESWARAN A.D. SUKAVANESHWAR A.N. DYANESWARAN I.A.S, THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SPE ACB/CBI SHASTRI BHAVAN CHENNAI 3 ORDER This application has been filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of O.S.Rules r/w Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure r/w Section 3 of Partition Act for passing a final decree in the above suit by allotting 2/3rd share to the applicant by metes and bounds based on the Advocate Commissioner's report.2. The applicant filed a suit for partition against defendants/respondents and preliminary decree was passed on 25.02.2011. The plaintiff/applicant was held entitled to separate possession of 2/3rd share in the suit property.3. It is submitted, that in pursuance to the preliminary decree, the suit property was divided by metes and bounds, by allotting 2/3rd ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vijay Granites Pvt. Ltd
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated:28. 01.2013 Coram The Honourable Mr.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR and The Honourable Mrs.JUSTICE S.VIMALA Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.2667 to 2670 of 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax Coimbtore ... Appellant in all the T.Cs. Vs. M/s. Vijay Granites Pvt. Ltd., 3 TTP Staff Quarters, Tiruppur ... Respondent in all the T.Cs. APPEALS under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench, dated 28.02.2001, in ITA Nos.2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025/Mds/1992, respectively. For Appellant in all T.Cs. : Mr. TN.V.Balaji, for, Mr. J.Narayanaswamy For Respondent in all T.Cs : Mr. P.J.Risikesh - - - C O M M O N (The order of the Court was made by S.Vimala, J.,) The Revenue has preferred the above appeals against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 28.02.2001, in ITA Nos.2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025/Mds/1992, covering the assessment years 1986-1987, 1987-1988, 1988-1989 and 1989...
Linga Nadar Vs. Manohari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:28. 01.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR S.A.No.11 of 2013 Linga Nadar .. Appellant -Vs- Manohari .. Respondent Second Appeal filed under section 100 of C.P.C against the judgment and decree of the learned Principal District Judge of Tiruvallur made in A.S.No.14/2011 dated 10.07.2012 reversing the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Ponneri made in O.S.No.51 of 2005 dated 11.09.2009. For appellant : Mr.G.Thangavel ----- JUDGMENT The defendant in the original suit is the appellant in the second appeal. The suit O.S.No.51 of 2005 was filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,56,613/- consisting of Rs.1,00,000/- as principal component and Rs.56,613 as interest component upto the date of plaint based on the allegation that the appellant herein/defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- promising to repay the said amount with an interest at the rate of 24% p.a and executed a promissory note to the said effect on 2...
Manivelraj Vs. K.Hazarath Reddy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:28. 01/2013 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA O.A.No.558 of 2012 in C.S.No.456 of 2012 Manivelraj vs K.Hazarath Reddy ORDER: VINOD K. SHARMA,J., This application under Order XIV Rule 8 of O.S.Rules r/w Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has been filed for grant of interim injunction, restraining the respondents 1 to 3, their men, agent, servants or anyone claiming through them from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property in any manner whatsoever pending disposal of the suit.2. The plaintiffs/applicants have filed suit for declaration, that the plaintiff nos.1 to 4 are the absolute owners of the suit schedule property, bearing Plot No.12 situated at No.154, Madipakkam Madura, Puzhithivakkam Village, Moolakothalama Line, 19th Thakku comprised in S.No.86/11 measuring 1564 sa.ft. The plaintiffs/applicants have also challenged the Sale Certificates dated 25.06.2002...
State, Rep.by Vs. 1.Sathiskumar, S/O.Murugesan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:28/01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU Criminal Appeal (MD) No.517 of 2006 State, rep.by Inspector of Police, Pasupathipalayam P.S., Karur District. ... Appellant/ Complainant vs. 1.Sathiskumar, S/o.Murugesan 2.Murugesan, S/o.Rasappa Gounder... Respondents/ Accused Criminal Appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of acquittal, dated 10.08.2006, in S.C.No.23 of 2006 on the file of learned Sessions Judge, Karur Division, Karur. !For Appellant ... Mr.A.Ramar, Addl.Public Prosecutor. ^For Respondents ... Mr.G.Karuppasamy Pandian Legal Aid Counsel. :JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.NAGAMUTHU,J) This is an appeal against acquittal. The State is the appellant. The respondents herein are the accused in S.C.No.23/2006 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Karur. They stood charged for the offence under Section 302 read wit...
A.Poomani Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:28. 01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU H.C.P(MD)No.1479 of 2012 A.Poomani .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Palani, Dindigul District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Ayakudi Police Station, Dindigul District. 3.Anandhan 4.Ramesh @ Periyadurai 5.Kambalam @ Muttaie 6.C.R.Ragupathi .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce the body or person of the detenue, by name, T.Alagarsamy, (aged 56 years), who has been illegally detained by the 3 to 6 respondents and produce him before this Court and set him at liberty. !For petitioner ... Mr.N.Anantha Padmanaban ^For respondents 1 and 2... Mr.R.Ramachandran, Additional Public Prosecutor For respondents 5 and 6 ... Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy :ORDER (Order of the Court was made by M.JAICHANDREN, J) The learned counsel appearing for...
Muruganantham Vs. the State Represented by the
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:28. 01/2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU Criminal Appeal (MD).No.308 of 2006 Muruganantham .. Appellant vs. The State Represented by the Inspector of Police, Thandikudi Police Station, in Cr.No.131 of 2003 Dindigul .. Respondent Criminal appeal is filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records and set aside the judgment of connection and sentence passed in S.C.No.89/2005, dated 10.05.2006 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Fast Track Court, Dindigul and acquit the appellant/accused from all the charges levelled against him. !For petitioner ... Mr.S.Gopalakrishna Laskhman Raju Senior Counsel ^For respondent ... Mr.A.Ramar Additional Public Prosecutor :JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.NAGAMUTHU, J) The appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.89 of 2005 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »