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.
M. Sowndarya Vs. The Inspector General of Registration O/o. The Inspec ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the Certificate of Registration of Marriage in Serial No.4624/2014 dated 15.9.2014 on the file of the 2nd respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to delete and remove the same from the Marriage Register within a period stipulated by this Hon'ble Court) 1. Heard Ms.D.Geetha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Pattabiraman, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.S.Y.Masood, learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent. 2. The writ petitioner is an Engineer by profession and she was appointed as a trainee engineer in M/s. Coastal Energen Pvt. Ltd at Tuticorin. The 3rd respondent was employed as HR Executive in the same company. The petitioner wanted transfer to Chennai from Tuticorin office and the 3rdrespondent had in...
C. Vijayakumar Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. By its Secretary to G ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.(D).No.164, Municipal administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.03.2016 and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Joint Director of Municipal administration above his juniors with all consequential and other attendant benefits including arrears of salary.) 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.(D).No.164, Municipal administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.03.2016 and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Joint Director of Municipal Adminis...
Sornabai and Another Vs. Monickaraj and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code to set aside the order made in I.A.No.49 of 2007 in A.S.SR.No.2062 of 2007, dated 31.7.2007, on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to set aside the order made in I.A.No.49 of 2007 in A.S.SR.No.2062 of 2007, dated 31.7.2007, on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil. 2. According to the Petitioners, the Petitioners have filed a suit in O.S.No.792 of 2000 before the I Additional District Munsif Court, Nagercoil for permanent injunction against the defendants in respect of the suit schedule properties and the same was dismissed on 16.11.2015. Aggrieved against the same, the Petitioners have filed an appeal in A.S.SR.No.2062 of 2007 along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 362 days in filing the appeal. The said application was allowed on payment of costs of Rs.500/- ...
The South India Road Milk Transport rep by its Proprietor N.Vaidhyanat ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 04.10.2014 and made in Ref.No.2211/PandI/12, by the first respondent and quash the same.) Challenging the order passed by the first respondent blacklisting the petitioner company for a period of three years, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is operating milk tanker lorries on hire basis to the respondent co-operative milk producers union. Originally, the contract was awarded by the first respondent cooperative milk producers Union, for transporting their milk to the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., Chennai. The contract commenced on 13.08.2012 and it expired on 29.08.2014. But by way of interim arrangement, the petitioner company was allowed to continue beyond 29.08.2014, by a mutual consent for a period of six months or till finalis...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
1. The plaintiffs/applicants have filed the present suit in C.S.No.828 of 2015 inter alia alleging that the defendant/respondent is indulging in passing off qua the three products touching upon the trade dress and get-up intentionally. Thus, the suit is laid for passing off with incidental reliefs. 2. Pending the suit, O.A.No.1102 of 2015 has been filed seeking an order of interim injunction restraining the respondent from continuing to indulge in certain activity. 3. A.No.6797 of 2015 has been filed to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to visit the premises of the respondent and seize the infringed products and also ascertain the details pertaining to the supply and manufacture. 4. Heard Mr. Hemanth Singh, learned counsel for Mr.Arun C.Mohan, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr.R.Sathish Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the records including the written arguments. 5. Brief Facts:- 5.1. The applicants are stated to be the market leaders in the manufacturing of...
Sarojammal and Others Vs. K. Velayudha Mudaliar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruttani dated 10.10.2014 in A.S.No.2 of 2014 allowing the appeal and reversing the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Munsif, Tiruttani in O.S.No.359 of 2008 dated 27.04.2012.) 1. The appellants are the defendants in a suit for declaration and for permanent injunction. The respondent herein filed the suit by claiming that he purchased the suit property from one Saradammal in the year 2003 under Ex.A1 sale deed. 2. According to the plaintiff, the defendants have no right or title over the suit property. On the other hand, the suit was contested by the defendants. Their specific case is that the vendor of the plaintiff viz., Saradammal, who said to have got the title to the suit property by way of a settlement deed, has conveyed the property in favour of the plaintiff under Ex.A1 specifically giving the boundaries to the property conveyed, ev...
P.K. Ramalingam Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By Secretary to ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in G.O.Ms.No.10, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (T.P.1) Department, dated 27.01.2014, of the first respondent to the limited extent of non-selection of the petitioner and selection of the fifth respondent, for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant / Tax Collector, by recruitment by transfer, under 20% quota allotted for the basic service employees of the Town Panchayat in Erode District, in the vacancies arose from the year 1998, till the year 2008 and consequently, to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner, by recruitment by transfer, as Junior Assistant / Tax Collector, in Erode District in the place of the fifth respondent herein, with retrospective effect and to grant all consequential benefits to the petitioner herein.) Order: 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking for the issuance o...
Michael Vs. Peter Raj
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code praying this Court to set aside the fair and decretal order made in E.P.No.5 of 2013 in O.S.No.42 of 2011, dated 22.8.2016, on the file of the District Munsif, Sathankulam.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to set aside the fair and decretal order made in E.P.No.5 of 2013 in O.S.No.42 of 2011, dated 22.8.2016, on the file of the District Munsif, Sathankulam. 2. The respondent herein filed a suit in O.S.No.42 of 2011, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Santhankulam against the revision Petitioner for declaration, permanent injunction and for recovery of possession. The aforesaid suit was decreed in favour of the respondent herein. Hence, the Petitioner preferred an appeal in A.S.No.51 of 2014 along with I.A.No.212 of 2016 for stay and the same is pending before the Sub-Court, Thoothukudi. In the meantime, the respondent filed E.P.No.5 of 2013, on the file of the District Mu...
S.M. Sheik Fareeth Vs. The General Manager (LPG) Tamil Nadu State Offi ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-21-2016
(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 passed in REF:MAO/539/10 dated 16/02/2011 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and further direct the respondents to give letter of intent to the petitioner for distributorship under the (Rajiv Gandhi Grama LPG Vidarag)RGGLV scheme for Idaykakottai Oddanchatram Taluk Dindigul District.) Challenging the order passed by the second respondent dated 16.02.2011, declaring that the petitioner is ineligible for award of Rajiv Gandhi Grama LPG Vitarak (RGGLV) distributorship at Idayakottai, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. According to the petitioner, the second respondent issued notification calling for applications for appointing distributors for LPG under Rajiv Gandhi Grammin LPG Vitarak Yojna (RGGLV) at various places in Tamil Nadu. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner applied for...
M/s. Hotel A.R.A.P. (P) Ltd., Chennai Vs. M/s. Buhari Sons Pvt. Ltd., ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 18 of 1980 as amended by Act 23 of 1973 and Act 1 of 1980 against the fair and decreetal order passed in R.C.A.No.260 of 2015 dated 21.03.2016 on the file of the VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai reversing the fair and decreetal order made in R.C.O.P.No.1083 of 2009 on the file of the XVI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai dated 24.03.2015.) 1. Challenging the judgment and decree passed in R.C.A.No.260 of 2015 on the file of the VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai reversing the order passed in R.C.O.P.No.1083 of 2009 on the file of the XVI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, the landlord has filed the above Civil Revision Petition. 2. The petitioner/landlord filed the R.C.O.P.No.1083 of 2009 for eviction on the ground of demolition and re-construction and additional accommodation. 3. The brief case of the petitioner/landlord is as follows: (i) According to the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »