Chennai Court October 2015 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. Pattar Vs. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District a ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to grant permission to conduct Adal Padal programme will be held on 25.10.2015 at Sri Kaliamman, Sri Bagavathi Amman Kovil Kumbabisekam Festival, Alagarnaickanpatti, Sithayankottai, Athur Taluk, Dindigul District and to give necessary Police protection to the said programme.) 1. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this Writ Petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the endorsement made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
S. Venkataraman, Proprietor of Vijayalakshmi Films Vs. K.S. Balakrishn ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer: Miscellaneous Petition filed under Order 41 Rule 3-A of the Civil Procedure Code, to condone the delay of 18 days in filing this Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2010 in O.S.No.150 of 2005 on the file of the Learned Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court No.III, Coimbatore.) M. Venugopal, J. 1. The Petitioner/Defendant/Appellant has projected the present Miscellaneous Petition under Or.41 R.3A of the Civil Procedure Code , praying for passing of an order by this Court to condone the delay of 18 days in filing the Appeal in A.S.SR.No.20590 of 2014 as against the Judgment and Decree dated 26.02.2010 in O.S.No.150 of 2005 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court-III, Coimbatore. 2. The Averments in Miscellaneous Petition (Filed by the Petitioner/Defendant/Appellant): a) The entire suit was misconceived, devoid of merits and hinged upon two documents which were forged and fabricated by the Respondents/Plaintiffs to support their case. ...
Vadivelan Vs. Rajeswari and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree of the Principal District Judge, Nagapattinam dated 14.10.1997 made in A.S.No.231 of 1996 confirming the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam dated 22.08.1996 made in O.S.No.207 of 1993.) 1. The plaintiff in the original suit is the appellant in the second appeal. The death-cum-terminal benefits lying in the hands of Southern Railway, represented by its General Manager, Chennai (the third respondent herein/4th defendant in the original suit), the amount lying in the hands of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, represented by its Senior Divisional Manager, Thanjavur (4th respondent herein/5th defendant in the original suit) on two insurance policies taken on the life of late Thyagarajan, the father of the appellant herein/plaintiff and an extent of 0.29.0 hectares (equivalent to 72 cents) of wet land comprised in R.S.No.56/8 of Visalur ...
Velu Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Tuticorin District
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer:Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. against the conviction and sentence, dated 18.03.2011, made in S.C.No.290 of 2010, by the Additional Sessions cum Fast Track Court No.I, Tuticorin.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.290 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Sessions cum Fast Track Court No.I, Tuticorin. He stood charged for the offences under Sections 294(b), 302 and 506(ii) IPC. The trial Court, by judgment dated 18.03.2011, convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows; (a) The deceased in this case was one Mr.Serry Antonyraj. PW2 was his associate. PW1 is the father of the deceased. Some time before the occurrence, the deceased and PW2 had attacked...
Vellaiyan @ Subramani Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Trich ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. against the conviction and sentence, dated 06.03.2012, made in S.C.No.91 of 2011, by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli.) S. Nagamuthu, J. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.91 of 2011 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli. He stood charged for the offences under Sections 341, 294(b) and 302 IPC. The trial Court, by judgment dated 06.03.2012, convicted him under all the charges and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 302 IPC; to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 341 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 294(b) IPC. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief ...
A. Mayammal Vs. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ramnad District a ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to grant one day parole to the petitioner's son Johnmartin @ John @ Ilanthanal from Madurai Central Prison, Madurai and set petitioner's son at liberty.) 1. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel appearing on either side submitted that the earlier order of this Court dated 20.10.2015 has been complied with. 2. Recording the submissions of both sides, nothing survives in this writ petition and accordingly, this writ petition is closed....
Abdullah Musaliyar and Another Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Virud ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the respondents not to harass and not to interfere in the personal liberty of the petitioners and their family members under the guise of enquiry.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. The petitioners have come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, to direct the respondents not to harass and not to interfere in the personal liberty of the petitioners and their family members under the guise of enquiry. 3. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), on instructions, would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by one Mydeen Batcha, petition enquiry has been conducted and the same has been closed on 04.03.2015 in C.S.R.No.354 of 2015. 4. In view of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate(Criminal Side), this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. However, in case of conducting any enquiry, the second respondent is directed to follow the dictum l...
A.C. Venkatesh and Another Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai D ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to pass an order directing the 2nd respondent to expedite the investigation in the above case in Crime No.695/2013 and file final report within the stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking a direction to the second respondent to expedite the investigation in the above case in Crime No.695/2013 and file final report within the stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court. 2. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner, a case has been registered in Crime No.695 of 2013 on 28.08.2013 for the offence punishable under Section 380 IPC,. However, the second respondent has not shown any interest to investigate the matter and lay a final report. Henc...
D. Manju and Another Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul Distri ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
(Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the second respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 21.09.2015 and investigate the same in accordance with law.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, to direct the second respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 21.09.2015 and investigate the same in accordance with law. 2. The learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side), on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner dated 21.09.2015, a case in Crime No.34 of 2015 was registered by the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b), 447 and 506(i) of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of TNPHW Act. 3. In view of the above stated position, the second respondent is directed to investigate the case in Crime No.34 of 2015 and file a final report in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. 4. This Criminal Original...
Esakkiammal Vs. State by Inspector of Police, CB CID, Tirunelveli
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2015
S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. This reference has been made by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, under Section 395(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, raising as many as five questions of law for a decision by this court. Before going into the said questions, let us have a quick look into the back ground of the reference. 2. This is a case of death in a police encounter. The victim of the encounter was one Mr.Kittu @ Kittappa. The occurrence was on 13.06.2015. The police team was headed by a Sub Inspector of Police. He used a fire arm in the encounter. The said Sub Inspector of Police made a report about the occurrence upon which a case was registered under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime No.119/2015 on the file of Suthamalli Police Station in Tirunelveli District. The said case was initially investigated by one Mr.N.Krishnaraj, the Inspector of Police, Suthamalli Police Station, Tirunelveli District. On his intimation, Mr.M.K.Mayakrishnan, the lear...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »