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.
S. Paul Jeyastan Vs. The Passport Officer, Passport Office, Madurai an ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-04-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings MDU/TM 80/11 dated 01.04.2011 and quash the same and consequently, directing the first respondent to return the original passport of the petitioner bearing No.J. 5659868 dated 14.02.2011 to the petitioner without making any remarks in the passport.) 1. The petitioner is aggrieved against the proceedings dated 01.04.2011, issued by the first respondent and consequently, seeking for a direction to the first respondent to return the original passport of the petitioner bearing No.J. 5659868 dated 14.02.2011. 2. It is seen that the petitioner applied for issuance of passport before the first respondent and based on such application, the first respondent issued a passport bearing No.J. 5659868, dated 14.02.2011. After nearly two months of issuance of such passport, the first respo...
Selvaraj Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Governm ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-04-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the second respondent made in Roc.No.1866 of 2005 (D-1), dated 07.03.2005 published in the Namakkal District Gazette Extraordinary No.5, dated 08.04.2005 and quash the same.) 1. The petitioner has submitted that he is the owner of the agricultural property measuring an extent of 3.55 acres of land comprised in S.F.No.291/1A2 of Singalanthapuram Village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District. The said land is his ancestral property and his family members are in joint possession and enjoyment over the entire extent of the property. There is a house situated in the said survey number and also there is a Well to irrigate the entire extent of the land. His father by name Duraisamy @ Muthugounder and his brother Subramaniam are also having shares in the said land. Neither his father nor his brother are doing active cultivation in the abov...
M/s.T.V. Brothers Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretary, R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2015
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to pass necessary orders assigning the land measuring 9237 sq.ft. in T.S.No.2111, Anupar Palayam Village, Coimbatore Taluk and Town, Coimbatore in favour of the petitioner.) 1. The petitioner has submitted that he has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the land measuring to an extent of 9237 sq.ft., in T.S.No.2111 in Coimbatore Taluk, from the year 1948. In September, 1948, the sanction of Municipal Council, Coimbatore, was obtained for relinquishing its right over the above said extent of 9237 sq.ft., in T.S.No.2111. Sanction was also accordingly ordered by resolution of the Municipal Council, dated 13.09.1948. The Council relinquished its rights over the above said 9237 sq.ft., of land in T.S.No.2111 and also recommended assessment of the same in favour of the petitioner. The proceedings of the Collector, Coimbatore, dated 12.02.1948, has also recomm...
M/s. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Namakkal Vs. S. Radha and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-03-2015
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, against the award dated 09.12.2002 and made in M.C.O.P.No.1193 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Trichy.) 1. The award dated 09.12.2002 and made in the claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.1193 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Trichy has been challenged in this appeal filed by the Oriental Insurance Company, who is the second respondent in the claim petition. 2. Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian, learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company has advanced his arguments on the following two grounds: (i) Liability and (ii) Quantum. 3. It is manifested from the records that on 05.05.1999, when the deceased was awaiting for catching the bus at Junction Circle Bus Stop, Tiruchirappalli, he was knocked down by Van bearing registration number T.N. 51 “ 3739 belonging to the fifth respondent, which was insured with the appellant insuranc...
S. Rajendra Prasad Vs. The Regional Transport Officer, Nagercoil and A ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-03-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to release the petitioner Mini Bus in bearing registration No.TN 28 A 5666 and consider the petitioner representation dated 14.11.2015.) 1. The petitioner is a minibus operator. The minibus bearing Registration No.TN 28 A 5666 was seized on 14.11.2015 by the second respondent on the ground that the minibus was operated in a different route i.e. it was not operated in the permitted route and on the other hand, it was operated in a different route and it was detained in Aralvoimozhi Police Station. It was also alleged in the seizure report that the petitioner did not produce R.C.book, Fitness Certificate and Insurance Certificate. In these circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for direction to release the minibus. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the route in which the minibus has to be operate...
S. Karuppiah, Founder of Central and State Government, Scheduled Caste ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus for the relief as stated within.) Sanjay Kishan Kaul, CJ 1. The petitioner claims to be the Founder of the Central and State Government Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes EmployeesFederation. He seeks to file the present Public Interest Litigation making a prayer for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to implement the reservation policy in the then forthcoming co-operative societies elections on rotation basis on par with Parliamentary and State Legislative Assembly Elections, in order to achieve the goal of the Constitution of India. 2. The petitioner claims that since the social system in our country is ailed by the caste system, the Constitution makers envisaged reservation system. In the year 1992, by the 73rd Amendment to the Constitution, Parts IX, IXA and Articles 243 to 243-ZG were inserted. Article 243(T) dealt with reservation in Municipalities. Howev...
S. Rajendran Vs. The Director General of Police, Chennai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-03-2015
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 19.10.2010 made in W.P(MD)No.7766 of 2010.) V. Ramasubramanian, J. 1. The appellant has come up with the above appeal, challenging the order of the learned Judge, passed in the writ petition filed by the appellant questioning the correctness of the order, cancelling his selection to the post of Police Constable Grade-II. 2. Heard Mr.ST.Sasidharan Tamilkani, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr.N.Manoharan, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The appellant was selected provisionally for appointment to the post of Police Constable Grade-II in the year 2006. He was also issued with an appointment order directing him to report for training on 29.02.2008. 4. But in the meantime, the Head of the Department came to know of the registration of a criminal complaint in Cr.No147 of 2006 on the file of Panavadali Police Station for the offences under Sections 143, 341, 188 and 353 I.P.C....
S. Kathiresan Poosari and Others Vs. The Secretary to Government, Hind ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2015
(Prayer: Writ petition No.17450 of 2015 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order No.Se.Mu.Na.Ka.No. 8/2015 A4 dated 21.9.2015 on the file of the fifth respondent and quash the same on the ground that the same is arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently, directing the respondents not to proceed further pursuant to the orders in W.P. (M.D.) No.15653 of 2015 dated 31.8.2015 on the file of this Court.) Common Order: 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the impugned order of the fifth respondent dated 21.9.2015 on the ground that the same is arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently, to direct the respondents not to proceed further pursuant to the orders in W.P. (MD) No.15653 of 2015 dated 31.8.2015 on the file of this Court. 2. The review application in Rev.Appln.(MD)No.43 of 2015 has been fil...
S. Anandhan Vs. The Secretary, Election Commission of India, New Delhi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-03-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in its proceedings No.282/DEL/Misc./2014 (Vol.III)/794 dated 25.4.2014, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to take appropriate action for declaring the Madathukulam Constituency (No.126) Tiruppur District, Tamil Nadu as reserve constituency for SC.) The Honourable Chief Justice: 1. The petitioner claims to raise the issue of re-designation of constituencies as a consequence of the administrative re-organisation of districts. 2. The petitioner, an agriculturist, belongs to the Scheduled Caste community. The petitioner claims to be living in the Madathukulam Constituency and belongs to the Arunthathiyar Community. The said constituency is a general constituency, while the petitioner prays for it to be re-designated as a reserve constituency for the Scheduled Cas...
Ranganayaki Ammal and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order in Na.Ka.S.R.568/94, dated 13.10.1995, passed by the third respondent and quash the same.) 1. The second petitioner has filed the affidavit on her behalf and on behalf of other writ petitioners. She has submitted that the property situated at Numbal Village in Survey No.45/2, measuring an extent of 0.27.0 Hectares (66 Cents) and in Survey No.55/3, measuring about 0.23.5 Hectares (58 Cents) in all aggregating to 1 Acre and 24 Cents (5050 sq.mts.) was originally allotted to her mother Mrs.Annamalai, by the Settlement Tahsildar, Thiruvannamalai and Patta bearing No.8, was also issued in her name, as per the Settlement Order, dated 19.07.1985. Ever since the date of the Settlement Order, the petitioners' mother was in uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid properties and paid kist for the same and in all the revenue rec...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »