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.
Yovan @ John Vs. State by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thingalur P ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment dated 31.10.2013 in Special Sessions Case No.46 of 2013 on the file of learned Principal Sessions and Special Judge, Erode District, Erode.) C.T. Selvam, J. 1. This appeal arises against the judgment of learned Principal Sessions and Special Judge, Erode District, Erode, in Special Sessions Case No.46 of 2013 on 31.10.2013, convicting the appellant for offence under Section 376(2) IPC and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-. 2. The case of the prosecution is that PW-1/complainant is the organizer of 'Vavval Foundation' registered under the Societies Registration Act. On 18.07.2012, at about 01.30 p.m., on seeing the victim crying near the Veeranampalayam bus stand, the complainant approached her, caused enquiry and came to know that the victim, who was a minor, staying in the Karunai Orphanage and studying 7th standard, was subjected to sexual...
Ayyanar Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police, R-6, Kumaran ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment dated 19.12.2012 in S.C.No.181 of 2010 on the file of learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethi Mandram (Mahila Court), Chennai.) C.T. Selvam, J. 1. This appeal arises against judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethi Mandram (Mahila Court), Chennai, in S.C.No.181 of 2010 dated 19.12.2012, convicting the appellant for offences under Sections 448, 506(i) and 376(2)(f) IPC and sentencing him to undergo 1 year R.I. and fine of Rs.1,000/- i/d 2 months S.I. for offence u/s.448 IPC, 2 years R.I. and fine of Rs.2,000/- i/d 2 months S.I. for offence u/s.506(i) IPC and life imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- i/d 6 months S.I. for offence u/s.376(2)(f) IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25.01.2009, PW-1, mother of the victim/PW-2, went to work along with her elder daughter leaving PW-2 and her brother/PW-3 at home. At about 06.00 p.m., while PW-2 was alone in her house, the...
Balaraman Vs. Bhanumathi and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 of Cr.P.C., against the order dated 08.09.2003 passed in C.C.No.6378 of 1989 on the file of IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai-15 acquitting the respondents under Section 255(i) of Criminal Procedure Code.) 1. The revision petitioner herein had filed a case in C.C.No.6378 of 1989 on the file of IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, against the respondents herein / accused stating that the complainant's mother and his father had owned the property bearing Door No.3, S.P.Road, Adyar. The complainant's parents had enjoyed the property for more than 40 years. After the death of his father, the property had been partitioned amongst his mother and step mother. The partition took place before a Court of law. Thereafter, the complainant had executed the said decree and took possession. The possession is under lock and key. Under the circumstances, the accused and others had broken open the lock and thrown out the articles from hi...
K. Ravi and Another Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-18-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in Ni.Mu.R.T.R.3944 / 2012, dated 04.09.2012 and quash the same, and direct the 3rd respondent to restore the patta in the name of petitioners for the Patta Nos.2354, 2355, 2356 in Sevalkulam village, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.) 1. Petitioners are aggrieved against the order passed by the 3rd respondent in transferring the patta in favour of the respondents 4 to 6 originally stood in the name of the petitioners. 2. The petitioners mainly contend that the impugned order is passed in violation of principles of natural justice as the petitioners were not put on notice before effecting such change in the patta. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondents fairly submitted that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter can be remitted back to the 3rd re...
H. Selvaraj Vs. The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Ltd., K ...
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 Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Tender -cum- Auction Sale Notice dated 08.10.2015 issued by the second respondent and to quash the same.) V. Ramasubramanian, J. 1. The Writ Petition challenges the auction -cum- Sale notice. Yesterday, we directed the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents/Bank to take notice and get instructions. 2. Today, Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents/Bank informed us that there were no bidders in the auction. Therefore, the auction could not take place and the prayer in this writ petition has become infurctuous. 3. In view of the above submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, this writ petition is closed as infructuous. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs....
S.A. Hakim Vs. The District Collector, Dindigul and Others
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 Mandamus forbearing the respondents or their subordinates from in any way constructing high tension electric transmission tower and laying high electric transmission lines through the petitioner's land in Survey No.406/4, 418/5C, Lingavadi Village and Survey No.285/11 and 289/6B Reddiapatti Village, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District.) Common Order: 1. All these writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners/land owners against the proposal of the Electricity Board/TANGEDCO to place the electricity line/towers for transmission of electricity in the route namely Alagarkoil-Natham-Sembatty. The writ petitioners herein are owning lands in different villages and survey numbers, in the route, in which the proposed work of placing of electricity line/towers for the transmission of electricity has been undertaken by the Electricity Board/TANGEDCO (hereinafter in short 'Board'). 2. It is th...
P. Rajesh Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corpor ...
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 Mandamus directing the first and second respondents to refer the petitioner to appear before the Medical Board of the third respondent Hospital to get report as to the suitability of the petitioner to do the job of driver and consequently to provide alternative employment of Helper on regular basis based on the report of the Medical Board.) 1. Since the matter arises under Section 47 of Persons with Disabilities (Equal opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and the issue is covered by various judgments of this Court and the Apex Court, the matter is disposed of at the stage of admission itself, after hearing both the sides. 2. The petitioner joined as driver on a daily wage basis on 24.10.2010. He was confirmed on 07.03.2012 by order dated 21.03.2013. According to the petitioner, he has suffered colour-blindness and liver problem. 3. According to the ...
V. Madurapandian Vs. Alagammal and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-18-2015
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 24.09.2014 made in I.A.No.615 of 2013 in O.S.No.1064 of 2010 on the file of the III Additional Sub Court, Madurai.) 1. Impugning the order dated 24.09.2014 and made in I.A.No.615 of 2013 in O.S.No.1064 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Sub Court No.III, Madurai, this revision has been preferred by the first defendant in the suit in O.S.No.1064 of 2010. 2. The respondents 1 to 8 herein are the plaintiffs in the suit. The remaining respondents are the defendants 2 to 7. 3. It is manifested from the records that the respondents 1 to 8 being plaintiffs have filed the suit in O.S.No.1064/2010 as against the revision petitioner and the remaining defendants as well seeking the relief of partition. Totally 17 items of properties have been included in the plaint schedule. This suit was resisted by the revision petitioner/1st defendant. The remaini...
The Correspondent-cum-Secretary, Scott Christian College, Kanyakumari ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-18-2015
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the Docket Order, dated 29.10.2014 and made in I.A.No407 of 2014 in O.S.No.184 of 2014, on the file of the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil.) 1. Heard Mr.K.N.Thambi, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Mr.S.Subbiah, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. No appearance for the 2nd respondent. 2. The revision petitioner herein is the second defendant in the suit in O.S.No.184 of 2014, whereas the first respondent herein is the plaintiff and the second respondent herein is the first defendant. 3. It is apparent from the records that the first respondent has filed a suit in O.S.No.184 of 2014 as against the second respondent and the revision petitioner seeking the relief of:- (a) Declaration that the clause incorporated in Chapter XXIV Section 60.4 B and C of the amended Constitution to alter the seniority list once in three months is illegal a...
State, Rep. by Inspector of Police, Alandur, Chennai and Another Vs. R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-18-2015
(Prayer: Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to modify the order dated 15.06.2012 in Crl.R.C.No.1411 of 2011 and M.P.Nos.1, 3 and 4 of 2011 by this Court and permit investigation of three cases viz. Cr.Nos.122/2009, 6/2010 and 7/2010 and to file a final report against the accused before the Jurisdictional Court in accordance with law.) 1. The first petitioner submits that he is the investigating officer of three cases in CCB Cr.No.122 of 2009 under Sections 120-B, 147, 447, 465, 471, 474, 420 and 506(ii) read with 34 I.P.C., Cr.Nos.06 and 07 of 2010 under Sections 420, 468, 471 I.P.C. and as such he is acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the above said cases from available records. He submits that this case was transferred to CBCID for further investigation on the orders of the Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu in Rc.No.20813/Crime(1)/2010 dated 10.02.2010. Based on this order the D.I.G., CBCID passed the requisite counter order to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »