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.
Arulmighu Sri Avinashilingeswarar Temple, rep. by its Executive Office ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.1926 of 2009 in A.S.No.28 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Tiruppur dated 05.12.2015.) 1. Heard Mrs.Hema Sampath, Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.Isaac Mohanlal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent and Mr.K.V.Dhanapalan, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the HR and CE Department 2. Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.1926 of 2009 in A.S.No.28 of 2009 on the file of Additional Sub Court, Tiruppur, the 5th defendant in O.S.No.311 of 2005 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Avinashi, has filed the above Civil Revision Petition. 3. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.311 of 2005 for declaration that the suit property absolutely belongs to the respondent/plaintiff Sabai and for a consequential injunction directing the defendants 1 to 4 to issue patta in f...
HDFC Bank Limited Represented through its Branch Manager, R. Padmanaba ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.66 of 2015, pending on the file of the 1st respondent Police.) This petition has been filed, seeking to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.66 of 2015, pending on the file of the 1st respondent Police. 2. The case of the petitioner is that there was an agreement dated 24.12.2013 between the defacto complainant / 2nd respondent and the petitioner, vide which a loan was obtained for a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- for purchase of a car. Since the 2nd respondent did not repay the loan, after notice to him, the car was seized by the petitioner and kept in their custody. Therefore, the defato complainant has made a complaint against the officials of the Bank and a case was also registered in Crime No.66 of 2015 for an offence under Section 379 IPC. 2.1. It is submitted that the respondent police also send an undated communication to the petitioner Bank, asking them to ...
Charles and Another Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police, Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2), Cr.P.C., against the judgment dated 21-04-2003 in S.C.No.335 of 2002 on the file of the Additional District Sessions Judge cum Fast Track Judge-2, Chennai and to set aside the conviction imposed upon the appellants/accused.) 1. The convictions and sentences, dated 21-04-2003 passed in S.C.No.335 of 2002 by the Additional District Sessions Judge cum Fast Track Judge-2, Chennai are being challenged in the present Criminal Appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 08-09-2001, at about 12:10 p.m., near seashore both the accused have deterred the deceased and both of them have attacked him by using their hands and due to their overtacts, the deceased has passed away. After occurrence, the defacto complainant by name, Saravanan has given a complaint and the same has been registered in Crime No.737 of 2001. 3. On receipt of the complaint, the Investigating Officer viz., P.W.9, has taken up investigation, examined connected witnesses and a...
Ameerjan (Deceased) and Others Vs. Shantha
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.38 of 2011 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal dated 28.10.2014 confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No.843 of 2004 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Namakkal dated 23.02.2007.) 1. The defendants in O.S.No.843 of 2004 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Namakkal are the appellants. The plaintiff in the suit is the respondent herein. The respondent filed the said suit for declaration of title and for injunction to restrain the defendants from in any manner interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The trial court, by decree and judgment dated 23.02.2007, decreed the suit as prayed for. As against the same, the appellants filed an appeal in A.S.No.38 of 2011 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Namakkal. By decree and judgment dated 28.10.2014, the lower appellate court dismisse...
G. Venkitasamy and Another Vs. The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Comm ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
(Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in its proceedings No.16414/CV-4(2)/2011-13 dated 30.06.2015 and proceedings No.16814/CV-4(2)/2011-16 (received on 29.07.2015) and quash the same.) Common Order: Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1. These writ petitions are filed questioning the justifiability of the separate proceedings of the respondent, viz., State Level Scrutiny Committee dated 30 June 2015, whereby and whereunder, the respondent, finding that the community certificates issued to the petitioners are not genuine, has recommended to the District Collector, Coimbatore and the UCO Bank and State Bank of India, respectively, who are the petitioners' employers, to take stringent criminal action against the petitioners. 2. The issue involved in both the writ petitions being common, both the writ petitions are considered and decided by this common order 3. The facts leading to the filing...
Daniel Vs. Dr.P. Muthuswamy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18 of 1960 against the judgment and decree of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, IX Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai dated 19.12.2014 made in R.C.A.No.603 of 2014 and 604 of 2014, confirming the fair and decreetal order of the Rent Controller, XI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai dated 5.8.2014 made in RCOP Nos.1183 and 1185 of 2012.) Common Order 1. C.R.P.(NPD)No.1762 of 2015 arises against the judgment and decree passed in R.C.A No.603 of 2014 on the file of Rent Control Appellate Authority, IX Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, confirming the order passed in R.C.O.P No.1183 of 2012 on the file of Rent Controller, XI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai. The tenant is the petitioner. 2. C.R.P.(NPD)No.1763 of 2015 arises against the judgment and decree passed in R.C.A No.604 of 2014 on the file of Rent Control Appellate Authority, IX Judge, Court of Small ...
M.P. Bhavani Vs. State Rep. By Inspector of Police, Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., against the judgment made in S.C.No.553 of 2005 dated 28.02.2007 on the file of the Additional District Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Chengalpattu.) 1. Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to the convictions and sentences dated 28.2.2007 passed in Sessions Case No.553 of 2005 by the Additional District Court, (Fast Track Court No.1), Chengelpet. 2. In the instant case, an incipient of 25 years old married woman due to consistent demand of dowry by her mother-in-law, has been forced to commit suicide along with her son, aged 1-1/2 years, without attaining efflorescence in their life. 3. The conspectus of the case of the prosecution is that the accused is the mother of one Barathuram and he married the deceased, viz., Vimala on 3.2.2003. After marriage, the accused has made consistent demand of dowry in the form of cash and jewels from the deceased. Since the deceased has not been able to brook the consistent demand...
The Law Debenture Trust Corporation P.L.C. and Others Vs. Sakthi Sugar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-21-2015
(Prayer: Petition filed under section 433 (e), (f) r/w. Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 to order winding up of the respondent Company namely Sakthi Sugars Limited in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.) 1. This Company Petition has been preferred under Section 433 (e), (f) r/w. Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2. On this day, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise, registered by a Notary dated 21/11/2015. Compromise Memo entered into between the petitioners and the respondent, duly signed by the parties and their respective learned counsel, is extracted hereunder. The petitioner No.2, Petitioner No.3 along with D.E. Shaw Valence International, Inc., having its place of business at Craigmuir Chamges P.O. Box 71 Road Town, Tortola British Virgin Islands (D.E.Shaw), collectively hold 75% of US$ 40,000,000 zero coupon foreign currency convertible bonds due 2011 (...
A. Yasim Khan Vs. A. Abdul
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-18-2015
(Prayer:- Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the judgment dated 17.8.2007 passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.I, Salem) in C.A.No.54 of 2006, reversing the order dated 20.3.2006, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Salem in C.C.No.1124 of 2004.) 1. The order of acquittal passed in Crl.A.No.54 of 2006, by the Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court No.I), Salem, is being challenged in the present criminal appeal. 2. The appellant herein, as complainant, has filed a complaint in question under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Salem and the same has been taken on file in Calendar Case No.1124 of 2004, wherein, the present respondent has been shown as sole accused. 3. It is averred in the complaint that the accused has received a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- by way of debt, from the complainant, on 10.08.2000 and to that extent, he executed a promissory note. ...
State by Inspector of Police Vs. D. Sathyamurthy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-18-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the order acquitting the respondent passed by the Special Judge, Pondicherry in Special C.C.No.2 of 1986 dated 27.9.2002.) 1. This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the order of acquittal dated 27th day of September 2002 in Special Calendar Case No.2 of 1986 by the Special Judge at Pondicherry. 2. The case of the prosecution is that during the relevant period, the accused has served as Assistant Engineer in Electricity Department, Karaikal. One Nageswara Rao has served as Junior Engineer. The accused, as Assistant Engineer, has had jurisdiction over Yanam. The accused has demanded and accepted an illegal gratification of Rs.4,500/- from the complainant and thereby committed the offences punishable under section 120-B of IPC and also under sections 5(1)(a) and 5(1)(d) r/w 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. 3. The trial court, after hearing arguments of both sides and upon perusing relevant records...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »