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.
Pandiyan Vs. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul District
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent to grant permission and protection for cultural event namely 'Adal Padal' scheduled to be held on 17.10.2015 at night in connection with yearly festival at Arulmigu Sri Thiruppathiyan Kovil @ Sri Gothandaramaswamy Thirukovil at Boolathur Village, Kodaikanal Taluk, Dindigul District.) 1. Mr.N.Manoharan, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the Respondents. By consent, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent to grant permission and protection for cultural event namely 'Adal Padal' scheduled to be held on 17.10.2015 at night in connection with yearly festival at Arulmigu Sri Thiruppath...
S. Madhavan and Another Vs. Manikandan, The Inspector of Police, Theni ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying to punish the Contemnor / Respondent, for his deliberate and willful disobedience of the order of this Court in Crl.OP(MD)No.18997 of 2014 vide its order dated 08.12.2014.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this Contempt Application, under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, praying to punish the Contemnor / Respondent, for his deliberate and willful disobedience of the order of this Court in Crl.OP(MD)No.18997 of 2014 vide its order dated 08.12.2014. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.K.Anbarasan, learned Government Advocate (crl.side), on instruction, would submit that pursuant to the direction of this Court, the respondent has filed the final report before the jurisdictional court, which was taken on file in C.C.No.4 of 2015. 4. In the light of the submission made by the...
M.V.S. Rajendranath Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli Dist ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the second respondent to secure the accused and to direct the first respondent to monitor the investigation in case in Crime No.243 of 2013 which is pending on the file of the second respondent.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking a direction, to the second respondent to secure the accused and to direct the first respondent to monitor the investigation in case in Crime No.243 of 2013 which is pending on the file of the second respondent stating that on the basis of the complaint given by him a case was registered in Crime No.243 of 2013 for the offence under Section 409 IPC on 10.12.2013, but no steps have been taken for investigation. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court. 2. The respondent filed a detailed counter stating that after registration of the case, they have examined witnesses. Now they arrested A2 and A3, A1 was already enlarged on anticipatory bail a...
Rajapandi and Another Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Theni District ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the respondents to register the petitioner's complaint dated 18.04.2014 and to investigate the same in accordance with law.) 1. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition. 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 petition is dismissed as withdrawn....
R. Chitra and Another Vs. The Managing Director, Metropolitan Transpor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to enhance the amount awarded in M.C.O.P.No.620 of 2010, dated 10.07.2013, on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Judge-I, Chennai.) 1. The short facts of the case are as follows:- On 17.02.2010, at about 12.00 hours, when the deceased was traveling in the MTC Bus bearing registration No.TN-01-N-4182 at Perambur High Road, the bus was stopped at Mangalapuram Bus Stop. While the deceased was alighting from the bus at the bus stop, the driver of the bus without observing the alighting of passengers, suddenly drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner. As a result of which, the deceased fell down from the bus and sustained grievous injuries and admitted in KMC Hospital and in spite of medical treatment, he died. Hence, the legal-heirs of the deceased have filed the claim against the respondent / Transport Corporation. 2. The respondent / Transport Corporation had filed a ...
N. Murugan Vs. P. Ramachandran
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying to punish the respondent for contempt, for willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8009 of 2010 dated 29.10.2010.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this Contempt Application, under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, praying to punish the respondent for contempt, for willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8009 of 2010 dated 29.10.2010. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. 3. Today, on direction, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Madurai is present. 4. Mr.K.Anbarasan, the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondent would submit that in pursuance to the order passed by this Court, even though final report has been filed well in advance, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Madurai, has appointed a new investigating officer, ...
R. Flower Vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Tuticorin and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first and the second respondents to grant the benefit of the subsidy scheme of NABARD with regard to the Rural Godown constructed by the petitioner at 1) 2/146S-1 STERLITE MAIN GATE, MADURAI BYE PASS ROAD, MILLAVITTAN VILLAGE, TUTICORIN 628 002 and 2) 2/146S-II STERLITE MAIN GATE, MADURAI BYE PASS ROAD, MILLAVITTAN VILLAGE, TUTICORIN 628 002 and release a sum of Rs.22,44,340/-.) 1. The Writ Petition has been filed praying for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first and the second respondents to grant the benefit of the subsidy Scheme of NABARD with regard to the Rural Godown constructed by the petitioner at 1) 2/146S-1 STERLITE MAIN GATE, MADURAI BYE PASS ROAD, MILLAVITTAN VILLAGE, TUTICORIN 628 002 and 2) 2/146S-II STERLITE MAIN GATE, MADURAI BYE PASS ROAD, MILLAVITTAN VILLAGE, TUTICORIN 628 002 and release a sum of Rs.22,44,340/-. 2. The facts leading to...
R. Shankar Vs. The Director, Government Press and Stationary and Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner based on the seniority in any one of Government Press in the State there by consider the representation dated 21.7.2012.) 1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner, based on his seniority, in any one of Government presses in the State of Tamil Nadu, considering his representation, dated 21.7.2012. 3. The petitioner has stated that he is a physically challenged person. He has completed 10th standard during the year, 1996. Thereafter, he had joined a course conducted by the second respondent to qualify himself as a book binder. He had also registered his name in the employment exchange. In spite of the representations sent by the ...
The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Prayer: Review Application filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with 114 of CPC, to review the order dated 10.07.2012 in W.A.No.1340 of 2012, on the file of this Court.) Common Judgment: T.S. Sivagnanam, J. 1. The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, TNGEDCO, (hereinafter referred to as applicant/Board) is the appellant in all these Review Applications and they are directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.1340 and 1341 of 2012, dated 10.07.2012 and W.A.Nos.1342 to 1363 of 2012, dated 11.07.2012. As against the order passed by the Division Bench, the Review Applicant preferred Special Leave Petitions before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.24740-24741 of 2012. 2. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the Special Leave Petitions by order dated 08.04.2013, observed that the dismissal of the Special Leave Petitions will not preclude the Applicant to apply to the High Court for r...
S. Muthalraj Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thoothukudi District ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-16-2015
(Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order A.Thi.Moo.No.82/2015 dated 17.06.2015 on the file of the fourth respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the fourth respondent to register the document dated 17.06.2015 in respect of house site situated in Panchalankurichi Village, Revenue Survey No.483/1, Plot No.13 to the extent of 1350 Sq.ft 125.418 Sq.mt or 3.0999 cents, Tuticorin District.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order A.Thi.Moo.No.82/2015 dated 17.06.2015 on the file of the fourth respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the fourth respondent to register the document dated 17.06.2015 in respect of house site situated in Panchalankurichi Village, Revenue Survey No.483/1, Plot No.13 to the extent of 1350 Sq.ft 125.418 Sq....