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.
Latha @ Stella and Another Vs. J. Ganessin
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code against the fair and decreetal order made in I.A.No.334 of 2015 in O.S.No.1295 of 2010 dated 11.03.2016 on the file of the 1st Additional District Munsif, Puducherry.) 1. Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.334 of 2015 in O.S.No.1295 of 2010 on the file of the 1st Additional District Munsif, Puducherry, the defendants have filed the above Civil Revision Petition. 2. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.1295 of 2010 for declaration and permanent injunction. 3. Since the defendants failed to appear before the trial Court, the trial Court set them exparte and passed an exparte decree on 10.08.2011. Thereafter, the defendants filed an application in I.A.No.334 of 2015 to condone the delay of 1339 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the defendants have stated that after the receipt of summons, they approa...
Siddammal and Another Vs. Selliandiammal Thirukoil, Rep. By its Execut ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 30.11.2005 made in A.S.No.53 of 2004 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhavani confirming the judgment and decree dated 03.02.2004 made in O.S.No.110 of 2003 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Bhavani.) 1. The appellants are the defendants in the suit filed for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction. For the sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as per their status in the suit. 2. The brief facts, leading to the appeal, are as under:- The suit property more fully described in the plaint belongs to the plaintiff temple viz., Arulmigu Selliandiamman Thirukoil, Bhavani, Erode District. One Mr.Kaveri was inducted as tenant by the plaintiff in respect of the suit property, 20 years prior to the date of filing of the suit. It is contended by the plaintiff that as per the terms of agreement, the land in question was leased out to the said Mr.Kav...
M/s. Titanium Tantalum Products Ltd. and Others Vs. State Bank of Indi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondent bank from bringing the secured assets both movables and immovable properties of the petitioners for public e-auction sale on 07.09.2016 or on subsequent dates and consequently direct the respondent bank to consider the request of the first petitioner company for restructuring the loan.) S. Manikumar, J 1. Heard Mr.S.Rajasekar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.M.Devaraj, learned counsel for the respondent-bank. 2. M/s.Titanium Tantalum Products Ltd, a firm along with it directors and legal representatives of the founder-director, have joined together and sought for a writ of mandamus, forbearing the respondent bank from bringing the secured assets, both movables and immovable properties of the petitioners for public e-auction sale on 07.09.2016, or on subsequent dates and consequently, prayed for a direction to the respondent bank to consider the reques...
M. Kamala and Others Vs. Uma Ravichandran and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: in A.S.No.718 of 2009:This appeal is filed against the Judgment and Decree, dated 20.11.2008 made in O.S.No.8173 of 2006, on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.IV, Chennai-1, is against the appellants herein is liable to be set aside. A.S.No.883 of 2009: This appeal is filed to set aside the decree and judgment, dated 20.11.2008 passed in O.S.No.8173 of 2006, on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.IV, Chennai-1) 1. These appeals are arise out of the suit in O.S.No.8173 of 2006. The plaintiffs 1 and 2 in the said suit are the appellants in A.S.No.883 and defendants 1, 3 and 6 are the appellants in A.S.No.718 of 2009. 2. The suit was filed by the plaintiffs seeking partition and separate possession of their 2/5 share in the suit property. The second plaintiff is a mentally ill person and the first plaintiff has been appointed as the guardian under Order 32 Rule 15 of C.P.C. According to the plaintiffs the suit 'A' Schedule p...
Kumar and Others Vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, E. Pudur P ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. against the judgment, dated 13.08.2014, made in S.C.No.195 of 2013, by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli Division, Tiruchirapalli District.) 1. The appellants are the accused 1 to 4 in S.C.No.195 of 2013 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli Division. Including these appellants, there were a total number of ten accused. The trial Court framed as many as five charges against them as detailed below: Charge NoAgainstOffence U/s.1A1 to A5147 and 148 IPC2A1 to A9341 IPC3A1 to A9302 IPC4A1 to A2307 IPC5A10302 r/w 114 IPC 2. By judgment dated 13.08.2014, the trial Court acquitted the accused 5 to 10 from all the charges, however, convicted the appellants/A1 to A4 alone under Sections 341 and 302 IPC and acquitted them from the other charges. The trial Court sentenced these appellants/A1 to A4 to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to under...
A. Abitha Nachi and Others Vs. K.S. Saroja and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P (NPD) No.541 of 2015 filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code against the order dated 16.09.2014 in I.A.No.18953 of 2013 in O.S.No.8957 of 2011 on the file of VII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.) Common Order 1. Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.18953 of 2013 in O.S.No.8957 of 2011 on the file of VII Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, the defendants 3 and 5 have filed Civil Revision Petition in CRP (NPD) No.541 of 2015. 2. Civil Revision Petition in CRP (NPD) No.4973 of 2014 has been filed by the defendants 1, 2 and 4, challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.6698 of 2014 in O.S.No.8957 of 2011. 3. Since both the orders were passed in the same suit i.e, in O.S.No.8957 of 2011, both the Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of by this Common Order. 4. Heard Mr.AR.L. Sundaresan, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the revision petitioners in both the Civil Revision Petitions and Mr.V. ...
N. Gopalakrishnan Vs. N. Babu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act as amended by Act 23 of 1973 and by Act 1 of 1980 against the judgment and decree dated 28.11.2014 passed by the VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Appellate Authority) in R.C.A.Nos.306 and 307 of 2012 confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 16.03.2011 passed by the XI Judge, (Incharge of X Court), Court of Small Causes, Chennai (Rent Controller) in M.P.Nos.376 and 377 of 2010 in R.C.O.P.No.1301 of 2009.) Common Order 1. Challenging the judgment and decree passed in R.C.A.Nos.306 and 307 of 2012 on the file of the VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, (Appellate Authority), Chennai, confirming the fair order passed in M.P.Nos.376 and 377 of 2010 in R.C.O.P.No.1301 of 2009 on the file of the XI Judge, Court of Small Causes, (Rent Controller), Chennai, the tenant has filed the above Civil Revision Petitions. 2. The respondent/landlord filed R.C.O.P.No.1301 of 2009 for evi...
S. Munuswamy and Others Vs. M. Rajendran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Appeal suit filed under Section 96 of CPC against the judgment and decree, dated 26.2.2016, passed in O.S.No.4897 of 2012 by the XVI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) A. Selvam,J. 1. This appeal suit is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26.2.2016, passed in O.S.No.4897 of 2012, by XVI Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The appellants herein, as plaintiffs, have instituted O.S.No.4897 of 2012 on the file of the trial court for the reliefs of partition and separate possession of their 3/4 share in the suit property and for permanent injunction, wherein the present respondent has been shown as sole defendant. 3. The material averments made in the plaint are that the first plaintiff is the father of the plaintiffs 2 and 3 and defendant. The plaintiffs and defendant are joint family members and for the benefit of joint family, the suit property has been purchased in the name of the defendant, by virtue of the Sale Deed dated 18.8.2004 and since then, ...
C. Vasu Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st Respondent to regularize the break period from 13.10.1983 to 07.08.1986 as per the judgment in W.P.No.18091 of 1996 dated 17.08.2000 and confer all the consequential benefits by considering the representation dated 20.03.2009 made by the petitioner.) 1. The petitioner has come up with this writ petition for issuance of a writ of mandamus irecting the 1st Respondent to regularize the break period of service from 13.10.1983 to 07.08.1986 as per the judgment in W.P.No.18091 of 1996 dated 17.08.2000 and confer all the consequential benefits by considering the representation dated 20.03.2009 made by the petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he joined as a Peon at the respondent office and subsequently re-designated as Office Assistant in the erstwhile Aided Management of Madras Hindu Sevak Sangh Aided High School. Thereafter, he was relieved fr...
The Managing Director, Tamil nadu State Transport Corporation, Villupu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-20-2016
(Prayer:C.M.A.No.2401 of 2015 is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award dated 01.11.2014, made in MCOP.No.3187 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuddalore (Special Sub-Court). Cross Objection No.2of 2016 is filed under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 01.11.2014, made in MCOP.No.3187 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuddalore (Special Sub-Court).) Common Judgment: 1. C.M.A.No.2401 of 2015 is preferred by the appellant-Transport Corporation against the award dated 01.11.2014, made in MCOP.No.3187 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuddalore (Special Sub-Court). 2. Cross Objection No.2of 2016 is filed by the claimant/injured against the award dated 01.11.2014, made in MCOP.No.3187 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuddalore (Special Sub-Court). 3. Background of the facts in a nutshell are as follow...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »