Chennai Court October 2016 Judgments
Union of India Represented by its General Manager Southern Railways an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari, calling for the order dated 19.04.2016 passed in Original Applications in OA/310/00137/2015, OA/310/00276/2015, OA/310/00335/2015, OA/310/00349/2015, OA/310/00355/2015, OA/310/00387 and 390/2015, OA/310/00464 to 468/2015, OA/310/00138/2015, OA/310/00329 to 331/2015, OA/310/00506/2015, OA/310/00189/2015, OA/310/00209 and 210/2015, OA/310/00235/2015, OA/310/00243/2015, OA/310/00337 to 339/2015, OA/310/00357 to 360/2015, OA/310/00363/2015, OA/310/00389/2015, OA/310/00397/2015, OA/310/00418 and 419/2015 and OA/310/00508/2015 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai and quash the same.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this writ petition is to a common order made in Original Applications in OA/310/00137/2015, OA/310/00276/2015, OA/310/00335/2015, OA/310/00349/2015, OA/310/00355/2015, OA/310/00387 and 390/2015, OA/310/00464 to 468/2015, OA/310/0013...
Tag this Judgment!Pattammal Vs. Pattukottai Alagiri Transport Corporation Ltd. Rep. by i ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the judgment dated 12.09.1997 passed by this Court in C.M.A.No.305 of 1989) 1. This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated 12.09.1997 passed by this Court in C.M.A.No.305 of 1989. 2. The facts arising out of this appeal are as under: (i)There were two claim petitions, viz. M.C.O.P.Nos.1011 of 1985 and 1076 of 1985 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (V Judge, Court of Small Causes), Madras. In M.C.O.P.No.1011 of 1985, the claimants are the parents of one Ezhumalai, the deceased in that case. In M.C.O.P.No.1076 of 1985, the claimant is the widowed mother of one Sekar, the deceased in that case. Both the claim petitions arose out of a single accident. On 30.06.1985, when the deceased Sekar was driving the auto-rickshaw bearing Regn.No.TMR-4901 in which the deceased Ezhumalai was a passenger, near the junction of Jones Road-Anna Salai in Saidapet, a bus belonging to the appellant Transport Corporatio...
Tag this Judgment!Ramalakshmi Vs. The Chair Person, Tamil Nadu State Commission for Wome ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
The prayer in the writ petition is for a Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in R.O.C.No.1240/WC/2009 dated 19.1.2010 and quash the same so far as the recommendation for severe disciplinary action as against the petitioner for giving a false complaint in Tamil Nadu State Commission for Women is concerned. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she was working as Associate Professor in the department of Chemistry, Presidency College, Chepauk, Chennai-5. She has put in 19 years of unblemished service. She is residing at a Government Quarters, Thirumangalam, Anna Nagar West, Chennai along with her two daughters. As her marriage was dissolved on 15.10.2008, she alone was to there to look after her family only out of the income, she gets. 3. The further case of the petitioner is that taking advantage of the status of the petitioner, one of her colleague, named K.V. Rajendran, Associate Professor, Physics Department of the same college, who happened to be a...
Tag this Judgment!Advocates' Forum for Social Justice rep. by its President, Mr. K. Balu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Declaration, declaring the Tamil Nadu Establishment of Private Law Colleges (Prohibition) Act, 2014 (Act 13 of 2014) as illegal, unconstitutional and ultra vires the Constitution of India. Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Declaration, declaring the Tamil Nadu Establishment of Private Law Colleges (Prohibition) Act, 2014 (Act 13 of 2014) as illegal, unconstitutional and ultra vires the Constitution of India. Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order made in Lr.No.4331/Regr/ACAD/A3/2014, dated 28.1.2015 issued by the second respondent, to quash the same and forbear the first respondent from interfering with the petitioner's right to process its affiliation through the second respondent to commence the law course in Saraswathi ...
Tag this Judgment!P. Veera Bhaarathi Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Principal S ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
(Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petitionis filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in order G.O.(D).No.646/Home [Prison IV] Department/2015, dated 28.08.2015, passed by the first respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to produce the petitioner Veerabharaathi, S/o.Ponniah, aged about 45 years/2016] in prison before this Court from their illegal custody and to set him at liberty forthwith under the provisions of Articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The petitioner is a life convict, lodged in the Central Prison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli. He has come up with this Habeas Corpus Petition, challenging the Government Order in G.O.(D).No.646/Home [Prison IV] Department/2015, dated 28.08.2015 and he has prayed for a Mandamus to set him at liberty. 2.The facts leading to this Habeas Corpus Petition, in brief, are as follows:- The petitioner was the first accus...
Tag this Judgment!Silambayee Vs. The Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathy Taluk, Pudukkottai Distri ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to direct the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam to dispose of O.S.No.106 of 2014, pending on its file within the period stipulated by this Court.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to direct the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thirumayam to dispose of O.S.No.106 of 2014, pending on its file, within the period stipulated by this Court. 2. According to the Petitioners that the aforesaid suit was filed for issuance of legal heirship certificate as legal heirs of their deceased mother namely Pitchi, who is the first wife of their father Chelliah. Whileso, the sons and daughter of the second wife of Chelliah namely Ramasamy, Rengasamy, Chinnakaruppan and Janaki have objected to issue legal heirship certificate to the Petitioners and requested the first respondent to include them as legal heirs. Hence the Petitioner has fil...
Tag this Judgment!K. Ramalingam Vs. Anjalai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
A. Selvam, J. 1. These Original Side Appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 24-11-2015 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in T.O.S. Nos. 22 and 25 of 2005. 2. The appellant herein in O.S.A. Nos. 145 of 2016, as plaintiff, has instituted T.OS.No.22 of 2005 on the file of this Court praying to probate the Will dated 16-03-1998. Likewise, the respondent in O.S.A. No. 146 of 2016, as plaintiff has instituted T.O.S. No. 22 of 2005 on the file of this Court praying to probate the Will dated 18-05-1994. 3. The material averments made in the plaint filed in T.O.S. No. 22 of 2005 may be summarised as follows: The respondents 1 and 2 and the petitioner are the children of Kandasamy Naicker and his wife by name Dhanabakkiam. The said Kandasamy Naicker has predeceased his wife. The property mentioned in the Schedule is the absolute property of Dhanabakkiam. The said Dhanabakkiam has voluntarily executed the Will dated 16-03-1998 in favour of the plaintiff. Under the s...
Tag this Judgment!Hebshiba William and Others Vs. C.S.I. Wesly Church, Ketti
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the Judgment and Decree of the Subordinate Judge at Udhagamandalam made in A.S.No.11 of 2010 dated 8.9.2010 confirming the Judgment and Decree of the Learned District Munsif, Coonoor made in O.S.No.13 of 2000 dated 17.11.2009.) 1. The defendants have challenged the Judgment and Decree of the Subordinate Court, Udhagamandalam made in A.S.No.11 of 2010 dated 08.09.2010 confirming the judgment and decree of the District Munsif Court, Coonoor made in O.S.No.13 of 2000 dated 17.11.2009. 2. The suit is for recovery of possession and for damages. 3. The averments in the plaint are briefly stated as follows: The plaintiff is the landlord of the suit property and the defendants are the tenants under the plaintiff on a monthly rent of Rs.100/-. As the plaintiff required the suit property for its necessity, it had requested the defendants to vacate and hand over the possession and despite promise, the defendants de...
Tag this Judgment!The Secretary, Agricultural Cooperative Bank, Nayakkarapattty, Tirunel ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to set aside the order dated 21.5.2003 passed in E.P.No.1 of 2003 in O.P.No.33 of 2002, on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tirunelveli.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to set aside the order, dated 21.05.2003 passed in E.P.No.1 of 2003 in O.P.No.33 of 2002, on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tirunelveli. 2. According to the Petitioner, the Petitioner Bank is a co-operative Bank functioning under the control of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act and Rules. The second respondent is the former employee of the Petitioner society. The respondent herein filed O.P.No.33 of 2002 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tirunelveli and by order, dated 16.12.2002, the said Forum allowed the O.P and directed the revision petitioners to pay the Savin...
Tag this Judgment!Joseph Vs. Janaki and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-26-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to set aside the fair and decretal order made in E.A.No.23 of 2009 in E.P.No.30 of 2003, dated 31.3.2010, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to set aside the fair and decretal order made in E.A.No.23 of 2009 in E.P.No.30 of 2003 in O.S.No.181 of 2001, dated 31.3.2010, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District. 2. According to the Petitioner, the second respondent filed a suit against the third respondent in O.S.No.181 of 2001 for maintenance, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District. The said suit was decreed and a charge was created upon the plaint schedule property and the third respondent was directed to pay a sum of Rs.12,000/- towards arrears of maintenance and to pay a sum of Rs.1500-/ t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »