Chennai Court November 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.
V. Karunakaran Vs. The Chairman, TANGEDCO Board Office, Chennai and Ot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-20-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the recordspertaining to the impugned tender Ref.No.CE-CD-SE-CD-HP 05-2015-16 on the file of the third respondentdated 28.09.2015 insofar as the Tender specification mentioned in Clause No.1.10.0 (ii) bid qualification requirements (BOR) and quash the same.) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect apart from submitting a letter dated 19.11.2015 seeking withdrawal of this Writ Petition. 2. In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed....
T.T.C. Cheran Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by the Secretary to Go ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-20-2015
(Prayer: Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in Se.Mu.No.A7/2358/2013, dated 18.11.2014, quashing the same and directing the 2nd respondent to transfer the entire seigniorage fee to Account No.1, namely Village Panchayat Account of the respective Panchayats referred to in the proceedings of the 2nd respondent, dated 18/11/2014.) V. Ramasubramanian, J. 1. The petitioner, who was formerly the president of a village panchayat and who was also a member of the District Panchayat, has come up with the above writ petition, by way of public interest litigation, challenging an order dated 18.11.2014, issued by the District Collector, Tiruchirappalli, and seeking a consequential mandamus to direct the Director of Rural Development to transfer the entire seigniorage fee to Account No.1 of respective village panchayats within his control. 2. We have heard...
Mahalakshmi and Another Vs. Ramakrishnan Naidu and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-19-2015
(Prayer: This second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 10.02.2015 made in A.S.No.24 of 2012 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee, confirming the judgement and decree dated 29.10.2011 made in O.S.No.55 of 1999 by the learned District Munsif, Poonamallee.) 1. The appellants are the defendants 2 and 3 in O.S.No.55 of 1999 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Poonamallee. Originally, the suit was filed by nine plaintiffs. Pending suit, the 2nd plaintiff - Doorvasalu Naidu died and as such the plaintiffs 5 to 9 were recorded as the legal heirs of the deceased 2nd plaintiff. Subsequently, the 8th plaintiff-Gajendran also died and hence, plaintiffs 5 to 7 and 9 were recorded as the legal heirs of the deceased 8th plaintiff. The respondents are plaintiffs 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 in the suit. The deceased one Venkatachalapathy Naidu was the 3rd plaintiff. The said suit was filed for declaration of tile and for recovery of possession of the suit properties and als...
N. Manigandan and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by t ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-19-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in connection with the impugned order passed in G.O(D).No.9, School Education (Public Libraries) Department dated 12.01.2015 and the consequential order of the second respondent issued in Na.Ka.No.14283/A1/2010 dated 12.01.2015 and quash the same and further direct the respondents to continue the petitioners in the post of District Library Officers.) 1. The petitioners challenge the impugned Government Order, in and by which, they along with one Mr.A.P.Sivakumar, were demoted from the post of District Library Officer to the post of Librarian Grade I and II respectively. The writ petition has been entertained and an interim order of Status Quo was granted in M.P.No.2/2015 on 22.01.2015 and it was extended from time to time. This writ petition is having a long and chequered history and it is not necessary to ...
V. Saravanan, Proprietor, Universal Constructions Vs. The Authorized O ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-19-2015
(Prayer: 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 proceedings No.Nil dated 08.09.2015 passed by the respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent to furnish the statement of accounts/Loan details in Loan A/c.No.30016564637 of the petitioner from 25.04.2011 up to 11.09.2015.) V. Ramasubramanian, J. 1. The writ petition challenges a notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Act 3 of 2002). 2. Heard Mr.D.Saravanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Sethuraman learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. It is well settled that, a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Act 3 of 2002), is not amenable to challenge....
Deivanai Vs. J. Masilamani Reddi and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-19-2015
(Prayer: This second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 14.07.2014 made in A.S.No.33 of 2014 by the Subordinate Judge, Arakkonam, reversing the judgment and decree dated 13.04.2010 made in O.S.No.345 of 2004 by the learned District Munsif, Sholinghur.) 1. The plaintiff in O.S.No.345 of 2004 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Sholinghur, is the appellant. The respondents are the defendants in the suit. The said suit was filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the B-schedule property. The learned District Munsif, by decree and judgment dated 13.04.2010, decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants preferred an appeal in A.S.No.33 of 2014 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Arakkonam. By decree and judgment dated 14.07.2014, the first appellate court, allowed the appeal and set aside the decree and judgment of the trial court an...
M.P. Ashok Kumar Vs. The Inspector of Police, Vriudhunagar District
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-19-2015
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents herein to produce the body or person of my daughter "Kaviya" S/o.Ashok Kumar, aged 19 years before this Court and set her at liberty.) P.R. Shivakumar, J. 1. The father of the missing girl Kaviya is the petitioner in the Habeas Corpus Petition. Alleging that she was missing from 13.11.2015 after 08.10 a.m., and stating that he came to understand from the enquiry made in and around, that the second respondent had abducted his daughter and he is keeping her in his custody illegally, the petitioner has sought a direction in the nature of a Writ of Habeas Corpus for the production of the person of Kaviya and to set her at liberty, if found to be in the illegal custody of the second respondent or anyone. 2. Based on a complaint lodged by the petitioner with the first respondent police on 13.11.2015, a case was registered in Crime No.860 of 2015...
S. Chandran Vs. The Principal Commissioner and Commissioner, Land Refo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-19-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent pertaining to the notification, dated 16.01.1985, under Section 11(1) and notification, dated 23.04.1985 under Section 11(3) pursuant to the Order, dated 23.12.1983 under Section 9(5) and final statement U/s.10(1) of the Tamilnadu Urban Land (C and R) Act, 1978 in R.C.A.1 134/82 and quash the same, consequently directing the 1st respondent to issue suitable directions to the second respondent to drop all further proceedings in view of Section 4 of the TNUL (C and R) Repeal Act (TN Act 20 of 1999).) 1. The prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to quash the second respondent's notification, dated 16.01.1985, under Section 11(1), notification, dated 23.04.1985, under Section 11(3), pursuant to the Order, dated 23.12.1983, under Section 9(5) and final statement under Section 10(1) of t...
The United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. P. Namaganesh and Anoth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-19-2015
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award made in M.C.O.P.No.3231 of 2013, dated 3.7.2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Special Sub-Court),Trichy.) 1. This memorandum of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited, who is the second respondent in the Claim Petition in M.C.O.P.No.3231 of 2013 as against the award, dated 3.7.2014, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Special Sub-Court), Tiruchirappalli. 2. The first respondent had moved the Tribunal with the above said claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.4 lakhs towards compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident said to have been taken place on 4.3.2011 involving a APE Cargo Auto bearing Registration No. TN 45 AL 4092 belonging to the second respondent/R1,owner of the vehicle, while the former was proceeding in a motor-cycle bearing Registration No. TN 45 AP 0714 along with on...
S. Vinoth Vs. The Secretary to Government, School Education Department ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-18-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the order passed by the third respondent in his Proceedings in O.Mu.No.4565/A4/2015 dated 18.08.2015 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to approve the petitioner's appointment as Lab Assistant in 4th respondent School from the date of the appointment on 12.06.2015 and to pay all the service and monetary benefits within a stipulated time.) 1. Since the matter is covered by the decision dated 29.07.2010 in W.P.Nos.4221, 4222 and 4224 of 2009 in The Secretary, The KRC ARC Girls Higher Secondary School, Muthialpet, Chennai-1 v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and the Division Bench decision of this Court dated 10.04.2015 in W.A.(MD)No.2 of 2015 in The Director of School Education and another v. J.Frederick Jeyakumar and another, the matter is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission. 2. Heard ...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »