Chennai Court October 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. Theerthagiri and Others Vs. The Director of School Education and Ot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to admit the petitioner in the L.L.B., 5 Years Law Course for the academic year 2016 -17 based on merits. Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of mandamus, direct the respondents 3 and 4 to admit the petitioner son viz. T.V.Venkatesan to the L.L.B., 5 years Law Course for the Academic Year 2016-17 based on his marks. Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to select and admit the petitioner to 3 year Law Degree course for the year 2016-2017 based on the merit in the selection, by considering the petitioner as satisfied 10+2+3 stream of education in compliance to the condition of Prospectus issued by the respondent University in May 2016 Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of Ind...
Vijayarani Vs. V. Chandrakumar
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw the case in HMOP.No.2792 of 2015 on the file of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai to the III Additional Sub-Court, Madurai.) 1. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 22.02.2013 as per the Hindu rites and customs. Since the petitioner could not procreate a child, the respondent started harassing her and driven out her from the matrimonial house. The petitioner further states that now she is residing her parent's house at Madurai and she is unemployed. She is living with the support of her parents and not in a position to spend for conducting the case at Chennai. 2. This apart, the petitioner filed a maintenance case in M.C.No.19 of 2015 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, which is pending. The respondent appeared in this matter and it is posted for adducing evidence. Further, the petitioner filed HMOP No.290 of 2015 for restitution of conjugal rights, whic...
Sumathi Vs. Kathiravan
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.408 of 2015 on the file of the I-Additional Sub Court, Madurai District at Melur Camp Court and transfer the same to the Sub Court, Dindigul.) 1. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 20.10.2016, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for dismissal'. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is also closed....
Ramya Prasanna Vs. V. Prasanna
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw and transfer the HMOP.No.2253 of 2015 on the file of the Family Court, Chennai to the file of the Family Court at Trichy.) 1. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 02.02.2009 as per the Hindu rites and customs. Due to the quarrel between the petitioner and the respondent, they have separated by leaving the matrimonial home. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that due to the strained relationship with the respondent, she was forced to leave the matrimonial home and now she is living at Trichy along with her parents. 3. The petitioner further contended that she is unemployed and not having any independent sources of income and she is living with the support of her parents and not in a position to spend money for conducting the case at Chennai. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent opposed the petition by stating that the contentions of the petitioner are false and ...
Settu @ Sekar and Others Vs. The Inspector of Police, B-3 Kanchi Taluk ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer :Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of conviction and sentence made in S.C.No.104 of 2007 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Kancheepuram, dated 21.9.2007.) 1. A-1 to A-5 in the Sessions Case in S.C.No.104 of 2007 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram, are the appellants. 2. In the Trial Court, after trial, they were convicted and sentenced as detailed below:- AccusedConvictionSentenceA-1Section 147Section 307 IPC5 years RI and fine of Rs.1,000/- i/d 3 months RIA-2Section 147Section 307 IPC5 years RI and fine of Rs.1,000/-, i/d 3 months RIA-3Section 147Section 307 IPC5 years RI and fine of Rs.1,000/-, i/d 3 months RIA-4Section 147Section 307 IPC5 years RI and fine of Rs.1,000/-, i/d 3 months RIA-5Section 307 r/w Section 149 IPC5 years RI and fine of Rs.1,000/-, i/d 3 months RI A-1 to A-5 have paid their fine amounts. No separate sentence has been imposed f...
G. Mani Vs. The Director Of Local Fund Audit Iv Floor Kuralagam Chenna ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling the records relating to the 2nd respondent in his order of recovery proceeding Na.Ka.No.12596/2008/F3 dated 06.07.2009 and quash the same as null and void; consequently direct the respondents to refund all withold amount of Rs.36 623/- with 18% interest and pay all the benefits as per the advance increment paid for passing of account test from 16.11.1986.) 1. The prayer in the writ petitioner is for a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling the records relating to the 2nd respondent in his order of recovery proceeding Na.Ka.No.12596/2008/F3 dated 06.07.2009 and quash the same as null and void; consequently direct the respondents to refund all withhold amount of Rs.36 623/- with 18% interest and pay all the benefits as per the advance increment paid for passing of account test from 16.11.1986. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a senior c...
Elephant G. Rajendran Advocate Vs. The Chief Secretary Government of T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
Section 22-A of the Registration (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 2008 has been notified in terms of the G.O dated 20.10.2016. It is fairly stated with this provision coming into force, sub section (2) would prevent registration of instruments of lands converted as house sites without permission for development of such lands from planning authorities concerned. However, the difference is that the proviso excludes the house sites which were already registered as such. We are informed that there are various categories of registrations which are not being made and which in substance do not cover the concern of the Court. For example, an illustration given to us was of agricultural land sought to be transferred as agricultural land with an undertaking to use as such, the case where we see no impediment unless there is some other legal impediment. There may be similar such other categories and the various applicants who seek to be impleaded, after some discussion, agree that they will categorise...
S.M.K. Abdul Mathaleep Vs. Beer Mohammed Masthan Sabele Dharaha Kanthu ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw the Trust O.P.No.160 of 2009 from the file of District court, Dindigul and to transfer to the file of Principal Sub Court, Dindigul and to try along with Wakf O.P.No.2 of 2015 pending before the said Court and deliver a common order.) 1. The present petition is filed seeking to transfer the Trust O.P.No.160 of 2009 pending before the District court, Dindigul, to the Principal Sub Court, Dindigul, to try along with Wakf O.P.No.2 of 2015 pending before the sane Court. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that he is resident of Natham Town and the respondents 1 and 2 filed Trust O.P.No.160 of 2009 before the District court, Dindigul, seeking permission to alienate the schedule properties said in O.P., as it belongs to a private trust created by the respondents' forefathers and deposit the sale consideration in a Nationalised Bank and to utilize the interest amount for charitable purpose mentioned in the tr...
M. Mariyappan Vs. K. Chandradevi (Died) and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer:Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the decree and Judgement of the Principal District Judge, Trichy, in A.S.No.183 of 2010 dated 12.03.2012 affirming the decree and judgment of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Trichy, in O.S.No.193 of 2010 dated 14.07.2010 and consequently dismiss the suit. Prayer:Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the decree and Judgement of the Principal District Judge, Trichy, in A.S.No.184 of 2010 dated 12.03.2012 affirming the decree and judgment of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Trichy, in O.S.No.206 of 2003 dated 14.07.2010 and consequently dismiss the suit.) Common Judgment: The plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No.706 of 2003 (Originally O.S.No.2904 of 1989) on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Trichy and the first defendant in the suit in O.S.No.193 of 2000, is the appellant in the above second appeals. 2. The case of the plaintiff in O.S.No.706 of 2003 is ...
C. Natarajan Vs. K. Dhinasundari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer in S.A.No.71 of 2011:Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the Judgment and Decree dated 12.07.2010 made in A.S.No.32 of 2009 on the file of the Sub-Court, Gudiyattam, Vellore District, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 04.08.2009 made in O.S.No.391 of 1999 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Gudiyattam. Prayer in S.A.No.72 of 2011:Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the Judgment and Decree dated 12.07.2010 made in A.S.No.33 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Gudiyattam, confirming the Decree and Judgment dated 04.08.2009 made in O.S.No.271 of 2000 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Gudiyattam.) 1. S.A.No.71 of 2011: The defendant, in O.S.Nos.391 of 1999 on the file of District Munsif, Gudiyattam, has preferred Second Appeal No.71 of 2011 against the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.32 of 2009 on the file of the Sub-ordinate Judge, Gudiyatham, dated 12.07.2010 confirming t...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »