Chennai Court January 2016 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. Bangaru Chetty Vs. Sri Sri Sri Kanagadhara Finance Shevapet, Salem ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-06-2016
(Prayer: First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 29.01.2003 made in O.S.No.99 of 2002 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Salem.) 1. The above appeal arises against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.99 of 2002 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Salem (originally numbered as O.S.No.387 of 1996 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Salem). 2. The 1st defendant is the appellant, the 1st respondent was the plaintiff and the respondents 2 and 3 were the defendants 2 and 3. 3. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.99 of 2002 to pass a preliminary decree for a sum of Rs.11,12,666.65 with future interest at 15% per annum, further directing that in default of the defendants paying the said amount, the plaintiff shall be entitled to apply a final decree directing that the mortgage property be sold and the proceeds of sale be paid into Court. 4. According to ...
Bhojan Vs. The Executive Officer, Veerapandi Town Panchayat and Anothe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.80/2015 dated 7.7.2015 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and non est in law.) 1. Mr.R.Ravichandran, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the first respondent. By consent, these writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal without ordering notice to the second respondent. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the proceedings of the first respondent. The petitioner is the purchaser of a ready built house, which has been constructed by the second respondent-builder. 3. The petitioner's case is that one M.Rathindran was the Proprietor of the second respondent Company and he promoted the lands in Veerapandi Village, situated at Press Colony, Veerapandi Town Panchayat, Coimbatore Taluk, Coimbatore District, by constructing independent resid...
Jambuveni Vs. Leelavathy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition No.2869/2015 filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 16.06.2015 passed in E.A.No.156 of 2014 in M.P.No.284 if 2004 in E.P.No.107 of 2004 in Ejectment Suit 32 of 1986 on the file of the Registrar, Court of Small Causes, Madras.) Common Order 1. Civil Revision Petition No.2869 of 2015 arises against the fair and final order passed in E.A.No.156 of 2014 in M.P.No.284 of 2004 in E.P.No.107 of 2004 in Ejectment Suit No.32 of 1986 on the file of the Registrar, Court of Small Causes, Chennai. 2. Civil Revision Petition No.2870 of 2015 arises against the fair and decreetal order passed in E.A.No.157 of 2014 in M.P.No.284 of 2004 in E.P.No.107 of 2004 in Ejectment Suit No. 32 of 1986 on the file of the Registrar, Court of Small Causes, Chennai. 3. Heard Mr.A.A.Lawrence, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. 4. E.A.No.156 of 2014 was filed by...
M/s. Opal Lapidaries Inc and Others Vs. V. Parthasarthy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18 of 1960 amended by Act 23 of 1973 and Act 1 of 1980 against the judgment and decree dated 07.01.2003 passed in R.C.A.No.1376 of 1996 by the Rent Control Appellate Authority/VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai confirming the order of XI Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai dated 13.09.1996 passed in R.C.O.P.No.1816 of 1993 passing an order of eviction against the appellants on the alleged ground of willful default. First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 04.09.2002 made in O.S.No.10770 of 1996 on the file of the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) Common Judgment 1. A.S.No.263 of 2003 arises against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.10770 of 1996 on the file of the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The plaintiff is the appellant and the respondents were the defendants i...
Radha and Another Vs. M. Radhakrishnan and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the Fair and Decretal order dated 25.02.2013 made in I.A.No.18056 of 2012 in O.S.No.2728 of 2012 on the file of the VIII Assistant City Civil Judge, Chennai.) 1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs, against the order dated 25.02.2013 passed by the learned VIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, in I.A.No.18056 of 2012 in O.S.No.2728 of 2012, in and by which, the said application filed by the second defendant under Sections 10 and 151 of CPC, for staying all further proceedings in the above suit till the final disposal of the appeals in A.S.Nos.343 and 344 of 2012, was allowed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs contended that the trial Court failed to consider the materials available on record in its proper perspective and erroneously allowed the application filed under Section 10 of CPC. It is further contended that the trial Court has failed to co...
S. Rajasekar and Another Vs. Sartaj Begum and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent) Control Act, 1960 against the order made in R.C.A.No.35 of 2011 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Tambaram dated 24.01.2014 and reversing the order dated 31.10.2011 in R.C.O.P.No.87 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Alandur and to set aside the same.) 1. The above Civil Revision Petition arises against the judgment and decree passed in R.C.A.No.35 of 2011 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Tambaram, reversing the order passed in R.C.O.P.No.87 of 2008 on the file of the Rent Controller, Principal District Munsif Court, Alandur. The tenants are the petitioners and the respondents are the landlords in the above Civil Revision Petition. 2. The landlords filed R.C.O.P.No.87 of 2008 for eviction on the grounds of own use and occupation, different use and act of waste. The landlords also filed R.C.O.P.No.90 of 2008 for eviction on the ground of willful default. 3. Th...
P. Ramanathan and Another Vs. The Estate Officer, SIDCO, Vellore and O ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order and decree passed by the Appellate Authority, District Judge, Vellore dated 03.09.2004 in C.M.A.No.1 of 1992 confirming the order passed by the Estate Officer, Vellore in his proceedings Ref.No.802/C/83 dated 14.02.1992. Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of certiorarified mandamus call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 1st and 2nd respondents in proceeding of allotment and on out right sale basis to the 3rd respondent subject to conditions through their proceedings R.C.No.14584/M3/2003 dated 05.11.2003, Memo of handing over permission Lr.No.14584/M3/2003 dated 17.11.2003, handing over the charge through letter dated 19.11.2003 etc. of the land with its dimension and area mentioned in these proceedings and work shed size 100' x 40' in it situate at Plot No.20, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Ranipet - 632 403...
Managing Trustee cum Chairman Ruben Educational and Charitable Trust V ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(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 impugned order issued by the first respondent State Government in Letter No.16031/E1/ 2014-2 dated 10.04.2015, quash the same and further direct the first respondent State Government herein to recognise forthwith the status of the petitioner as a Christian Minority Educational Agency for running the proposed college, namely, 'Ruben College of Arts and Science, Thadikkarankonam, Kanyakumari District'. With the consent of both parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal, as the matter is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in The Secretary, Immaculate College for Women v. The State of Tamil Nadu, reported in 2015(1) CWC 557. 2. The petitioner made an application to the Government to grant them minority status for the purpose of establishing Arts and Science College. The said application...
S. Jeyanthi Vs. The Inspector General of Registration, Mylapore, Chenn ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the 3rd respondent pertaining to Certificate of Marriage registered under Registration No.2957 of 2014, dated 30.06.2014 and to quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to delete, cancel and remove the same from the marriage records of the 3rd respondent office.) 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3. 2. Despite notice having been served and name printed, the 4th respondent has neither appeared in person nor through counsel. 3. Earlier, the 4th respondent filed a Habeas Corpus Petition in H.C.P.No.2141 of 2014 before this Court. By an order dated 17.10.2014, a Division Bench of this Court, after hearing the parties, was pleased to pass the following order: 5. In H.C.P.No.2141/2014, R.Ram Prasath, the petitioner, has stated that he...
Mangathai Ammal (Died) and Others Vs. Rajeswari and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure judgment and decree dated 5.8.1992 made in O.S.No.124 of 1990 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Arni.) 1. The above Appeal arises against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.124 of 1990 on the file of Subordinate Court, Arni 2. The defendants 1 to 3 are the appellants. The 1st appellant had died during the pendency of the appeal and her legal representative were brought on record as the appellants 3 to 5. Respondents 1 to 8 are the plaintiffs, 9th respondent was the 4th defendant in the suit and the respondents 10 to 12 are the legal representatives of the deceased 3rd respondent. 3. The plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.124 of 1990 for partition and separate possession. 4. The brief case of the plaintiffs are as follows:- (i) The 1st defendant is the wife of one Narayanasamy Mudaliyar. The said Narayanasamy Mudaliyar and the 1st defendant had one son and three daughters. Their son Elumalai and their daughter ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »