Chennai Court December 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.
Raja Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police, Thanjavur District
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of CrPC to call for the records pertaining to call for the records of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai in Cr.M.P.No.6161 of 2015 dated 21.11.2015 and to set aside the same and further direct the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukkottai to grant interim custody of vehicle viz., TATA ACE bearing Registration No.TN 31 AW 2399 to the petitioner.) 1. The Petitioner has focussed the instant Criminal Revision Case before this Court being aggrieved against the order dated 21.11.2015 in Cr.MP.No.6161 of 2015, passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukkottai. 2. The Learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukkottai, while passing the impugned order in Cr.M.P.No.6161 of 2015, on 21.11.2015, had among other things observed that the vehicle bearing Regn.No. TN 31 AW 2399 (TATA ACE) was unable to be produced before the Court inasmuch as the Additional Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur, had stated that the confiscation proceedin...
Raja Vs. State represented by, the Inspector of Police, Kanyakumari Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C. against the conviction and sentence made in S.C.No.235 of 2003, dated 10.08.2006, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagercoil.) 1. The appellant figured as first accused in S.C.No.235 of 2003 in the Court of the Assistant Sessions Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagercoil. He was prosecuted along with his mother Kamalam (second accused) for offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. After trial, by a judgment dated 10.08.2006, the trial Judge acquitted the second accused “ Kamalam of all the offences for which she was prosecuted, but convicted the appellant - Raja (A1) for offences under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC alone and acquitted him of the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The learned trial Judge imposed a sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment, a fine of Rs.5...
Sundari Annadurai Vs. The Principal Secretary, Home Department (Courts ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-10-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to issue appropriate direction to the respondents 3 to 5 to initiate appropriate proceedings against the witnesses in S.C.No.375 of 2013 on the file of the 1st Additional Sessions Court, Madurai to punish them under the relevant process of law.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 3 to 5 to initiate appropriate proceedings against the witnesses in S.C.No.375 of 2013 on the file of the 1st Additional Sessions Court, Madurai to punish them under the relevant process of law. 2. The case of the petitioner in nutshell is as follows: i) On 27.01.2007, her husband was brutally murdered by the accused persons with deadly weapons, pursuant to which, brother of the deceased lodged a complaint with the 4th respondent and a case in Crime No.121 of 2007 for offences under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307, 379, 109, 120(B), 149 and 212 IPC, has also been registered by the 4th respondent Police and t...
A. Manikandan and Another Vs. Manonmani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w.401 of Cr.P.C., calling for the records in C.A.No.85 of 2014 on the file of III Additional Sessions Court, Chennai and set aside the order dated 14.10.2014.) 1. This Revision challenges the order dated 14.10.2004 passed in C.A.No.85 of 2014 on the file of III Additional Sessions Court, Chennai. 2. Petitioners are husband and mother-in-law of the respondent respectively. Difference of opinion arose between first petitioner and the respondent. First petitioner/husband filed H.M.O.P.No.3172 of 2013 on the file of learned Judge, Family Court, Chennai, seeking decree of nullity of marriage. Pending such petition, the respondent/wife filed M.P.No.727 of 2014 on the file of learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, u/s.12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. In such petition, the respondent/wife filed M.P.No.735 of 2014 seeking a residential order. Such petition was allowed under orders dated 12...
A. Subbiah and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretar ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-09-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to sanction and award forthwith Special Grade and Special Grade to the petitioners in the post of Primary School Headmaster by reckoning and computing the petitioner's service rendered in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teacher from 01.06.1976 to 31.05.1988, 05.03.1971 to 31.05.1988 and 01.06.1974 to 31.05.1988 respectively on par with the similarly placed persons for whom such benefits have been sanctioned under G.O.Ms.No.234 (School Education (G2) Department) dated 10.09.2009.) Common Order 1. Since the issue involved in all the writ petitions are one and the same, they are all taken up together and disposed of by a common order. 2. The petitioners in all these writ petitions worked as Secondary Grade Teachers in the respective Panchayat Union Schools. The petitioners in W.P.(MD).No.21686 to 21688 of 2015 joined as Secondary Grade Teacher on 01.06.197...
Eternal Word Trust, A registered Charitable Trust, Villivakkam, Chenna ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2015
(Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the third respondent in A4/101/02 (Nisi) dated 05.03.2004, quash the same.) 1. The short facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner has submitted that the writ petitioner trust is a public charitable trust. The trust came into existence on 05.04.1999 pursuant to a deed of declaration of trust registered as document No.528/99 on the file of Joint Sub-Registrar to Madras North. The Trust owns the following properties:- i. 2.76 acres of land in survey No.5/2, No.37 Napalur Villabge, Thiruthani Taluk, Thiruvallur District; ii. 5.05 acres of land in survey No.5/1, No.37 Napalur Village, Thiruthani Taluk, Thiruvallur District; iii. 2.74 acres of land in survey No.6, No.37 Napalur Village, Thiruthani Taluk, Thiruvallur District; iv. 3.50 of land in survey No.6, No.37 Napalur Village, Thiruthani Taluk, Thiruvallur Dist...
Rajendiran and Another Vs. Murugan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code against the Order dated 04.02.2013 passed in Crl.M.P. No. 2779 of 2012 in C.C. No. 73 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puducherry.) 1. The revision petitioners are the accused in C.C. No. 73 of 2012 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puducherry. The said Calander Case No. 73 of 2012 has been filed by the respondent herein under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. praying to launch prosecution against the revision petitioners herein for having committed the alleged offences punishable under Section 468, 471 and 420 of IPC. Pending the Calander Case in C.C. No. 73 of 2012, the petitioners herein have filed Crl.M.P. No. 2779 of 2012 under Section 245 of Cr.P.C. to discharge them from the purview of Criminal Prosecution. The trial Court, by the order dated 04.02.2013 dismissed the Crl.M.P. No. 2779 of 2012 and refused to discharge the petitioners from the crim...
N. Valliammal (Dead) and Another Vs. M. Kanniah and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2015
(Prayers: S.A.No.1040 of 2015:- This second appeal has been filed under Section 100 C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 01.04.2015 in A.S.No.98/2014 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.204 of 2009 dated 14.10.2014 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Poonamallee. S.A.No.1041 of 2015:- This second appeal has been filed under Section 100 C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 01.04.2015 in A.S.No.96/2014 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.808 of 1996 dated 14.10.2014 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Poonamallee. S.A.No.1042 of 2015:- This second appeal has been filed under Section 100 C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 01.04.2015 in A.S.No.97/2014 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.202 of 2009 dated 14....
The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, Chennai and Another Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-09-2015
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act to set aside the order, dated 02.12.2010 made in W.P.No.26703 of 2010.) S. Tamilvanan, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The Writ Appeal has been preferred challenging the order, dated 02.12.2010 made in W.P.No.26703 of 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge. 3. The relief sought for in the writ petition is in the nature of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order, dated 16.06.2010 made in Na.Ka.No.89923/J4/08 on the file of the Director of School Education, D.P.I. Campus, Chennai - 6, the first appellant herein, to quash the same and consequently, direct the District Educational Officer, Erode, the second appellant herein to appoint the respondent herein on compassionate ground, pursuant to the application, dated 05.06.1999 made to the second appellant. 4. It is not in dispute that the respondent...
B. Ponnidurai Vs. The District Collector, Salem and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-08-2015
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 1st Respondent in Na.Ka.65/2009/Kanimam-m. dated 27.11.2010 and to quash the same and to direct the 1st Respondent to execute the lease deed in favour of the Petitioner with reference to the stone quarry in S.No.383/2B (Part-2) over an extent of 2.00.0 hectares in Erumapalayam Village, Salem.) 1. This Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner challenging the order of the 1st Respondent dated 27.11.2010, cancelling the quarry lease granted to him. 2. The facts, in a nutshell of the case of the Petitioner, are that by notification dated 28.1.2009, the 1st Respondent called for tenders for stone quarries in the lands in S.No.383/2B (Part 2) measuring 2.00.0 hectares in Erumapalayam Village, Salem Taluk and District under the Rule 8(1) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. The Petitioner submitted his tender on 23.2.2009, participated in the auction held on 24.2.2...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »