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.
K. John Peter Raj Vs. The Commissioner of Town and Country Planning, T ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to forbear the sixth respondent or persons claiming under him from converting the land in Survey No.92/1, Kattuparamakudi Village, Paramakudi Municipality, which is earmarked as a park and water channel as per the layout approved by the second respondent, dated 20.09.1982 to anyother purpose and consequently, direct the respondents to maintain the said lands as park and water channel.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to forbear the sixth respondent or persons claiming under him from converting the land in Survey No.92/1, Kattuparamakudi Village, Paramakudi Municipality, which is earmarked as a park and water channel as per the layout approved by the second respondent, dated 20.09.1982 to any other purpose and also for a consequential direction to the respondents to maintain the said l...
Lakshmi and Others Vs. Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Represented ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer in WP No.13229 of 2014 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India “ to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to regularize the services of the petitioners from the date of their appointment. Common Order: The petitioners herein, who were engaged as the Non-Teaching Staff like Steno-Typist, Plumber, Electrician, Data Entry Operator, Skilled and Un-Skilled NMR Employees by the respondent-Manonmaniam Sundaranar University (in short 'University') on temporary daily wages basis, seek to quash Memo No.MSU/R/Estt./Admn/2014, dated 12.11.2014, issued by the University, in and by which, the service of the petitioners with the University was disengaged; and they further seek this Court to direct the University to regularize their services from the date of their appointment. 2. Since all these writ petitions are interconnected and require joint disposal, they have been heard together and decided by this Common Order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would ...
M. Vijayakumar Vs. M. Natesan and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and Judgment, dated 25.09.2012, made in M.C.O.P.No.307 of 2008, (transferred and renumbered from District Court, Namakkal in M.C.O.P.No.1493 of 2004) on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Tiruchengode.) 1. The appellant / claimant has preferred the present appeal against the judgment and decree, dated 25.09.2012, made in M.C.O.P.No.307 of 2008, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Tiruchengode. 2. The short facts of the case are as follows:- On 28.09.2003, at about 08.10 p.m., when the claimant was riding his bicycle on Pallipalayam-Tiruchengode Main Road, a motorcycle bearing registration No.TN34 A5177 came driven by its rider in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against him. As a result, the claimant had sustained grievous injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition against the rider and insurer of the offending vehicle f...
Nirmala Mary and Others Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai a ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the respondent police to register the complaint given by the petitioner dated 18.09.2015 and take necessary action within the time limit fixed by this Court.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, to the respondent police to register the complaint given by the petitioner dated 18.09.2015 and take necessary action within the time limit fixed by this Court. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has given a complaint to the first respondent as early as on 18.09.2015, but, however, the first respondent police had not taken any steps to register a case and hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief. 3. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side), on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner in Current Paper No.2850/SP-SVG/15 dated...
Ramasamy Gounder and Another Vs. Dineswaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer: Revision filed against the order dated 27.1.2014, in I.A.No.1111 of 2013, in O.S.No.123 of 2008, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruchengode.) The order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruchengode, allowing the application filed by the plaintiff to amend the plaint is challenged in this Civil Revision Petition at the instance of the defendants, primarily on the ground that similar application filed earlier was dismissed as not pressed and as such, a fresh application is barred by the principles of res judicata. Facts in nutshell:- 2. The guardian of the respondent filed a civil suit in O.S.No.123 of 2008, before the Principal District Munsif, Tiruchengode, praying for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the petitioners herein from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. The suit was contested by the petitioners by filing written statement. The application filed by the respondent through guardian to ...
M. Krishnan Vs. The Assistant Director (Town Panchayats), Madurai Divi ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st and 2nd Respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner to the post of Motor Operator in Alanganallur Town Panchayat on priority basis and further restraining the 1st and 2nd respondent from appointing anybody to the post of Motor operator in contrary to the notification in Na.Ka.No.37/2015 dated 11.09.2015 on the file of 2nd respondent.) 1. On mere surmises, the second respondent has orally informed the petitioner that they are going to give an appointment to the 3rd respondent. On this basis, the petitioner sought for a direction to consider his candidature to the post of Motor Operator in Alanganallur Town Panchayat, on priority basis. 2. Although the petitioner in response to the communication dated 29.09.2015, attended the interview conducted on 12.10.2015 along with 12 other persons including the 3rd respondent, he has filed this Writ Petition ...
R. Ganeshan Vs. The Director of School Education, College Road, Chenna ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No. 14405-2/D3/2015 dated 14.08.2015 and Quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to include the Petitioner in the panel and promote as Bachelor Teacher (B.TY) in Mathematics.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed by R.Ganesan challenging the impugned order dated 14.08.2015, wherein the 2nd respondent has come to the conclusion fact that the petitioner obtained two degrees simultaneously, hence, his name cannot be considered for further promotion. Petitioner has obtained both B.Ed., and B.Sc., degree (Maths) in the same academic year, therefore, he is not eligible to be included in the promotion panel. 2. This Court, on similar and identical circumstances, consistently has held that a person, who has obtained more than one degree simultaneously, cannot be considered for promotion as h...
P. Ganesan Vs. The Chairman/Appellate Authority, Virudhunagar and Anot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent/the General Manager/Disciplinary Authority of Pandyan Gram Bank in his final order Lr AIVD/768/2013-14 dated 4.10.2013 and the appeal order letter issued by the Respondent-1/ The Chairman/Appellate Authority letter AIVD/1063/13-14 dated 27.12.2013 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to issue any other order to reimburse all petitioner disallowed and deducted benefits with appropriate interest.) The petitioner has come to this Court challenging the order dated 04.10.2013 passed by the second respondent, which was confirmed by the appellate authority in letter AIVD/1063/13-14 dated 27.12.2013, with a further direction to issue any other order to reimburse all his disallowed and deducted benefits with appropriate interest. When the petitioner has been ...
Shanmugam and Another Vs. Duraisamy and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and Judgment, dated 15.07.2013, made in M.C.O.P.No.219 of 2011, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Mannargudi.) 1. The appellants / claimants have preferred the present appeal against the judgment and decree, dated 15.07.2013, made in M.C.O.P.No.219 of 2011, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Mannargudi. 2.The short facts of the case are as follows:- 04.07.2011, at about 01.00 a.m., when one Muruganantham was driving a lorry bearing registration No.TN28 AB6381 on Trichy-Namakkal Main Road, a lorry bearing registration No.TN32 S6026 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the lorry driven by Muruganantham. As a result, the said Muruganantham succumbed to his injuries. Hence, the parents of the deceased filed a claim petition against the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle for compensation. 3. T...
Nawab Wallajah Sahib Pallivasal Vs. The Commissioner of Land Administr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-30-2015
(Prayer:- Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent, relating the order dated 21st September 1961, pertaining to the taking away of the landed properties belonging to the petitioner/Wakf/Pallivawal and issuing Ryotwari pattas to the encroachers of the the petitioner/wakf's properties and to quash the same.) 1. This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records dated 21.09.1961 pertaining to the taking away of the landed properties belonging to the petitioner/Pallivasal and issuing Ryotwari pattas to the encroachers of the petitioner's properties, and to quash the same. 2. The petitioner viz., Nawab Wallajah Sahib Pallivasal is represented by its Secretary viz., Mohamed Musthafa, who is one of the members of the Committee constituted by the 4th respondent viz., Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, in ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »