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.
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, Rep. by its Organization Secretary, R.S. Bh ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned Government Orders in G.O.Ms.No.103, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (PR-1) Department dated 16.09.2016 in respect of the offices of Chairman of Panchayat Union Counsils; G.O.Ms.No.105, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (PR-1) Department dated 16.09.2016 in respect of the seats of Wards in District Panchayats; G.O.Ms.No.106, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (PR-1) Department dated 16.09.2016 in respect of seats of Wards in Panchayat Union Councils; notification in Roc.No.12318/2016/C2 dated 18.09.2016 published vide Gazette (Extraordinary) No.220 dated 18.09.2016 on the file of the 3rd respondent and in R.D.(Elections) C.No.6416/2016 dated 19.09.2016 published vide Gazette (Extraordinary) No.225 dated 20.09.2016 on the file of the fourth respondent and quash the same, both on reservation and on r...
V. Kannan Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Chief Secretary to ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: Petition 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 G.O.(Ms)No.102, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (PR-1) Department, dated 16.09.2016, issued by the second respondent and to quash the same and also a consequential direction to the fourth respondent to pass G.O. by following the provisions contained in the SC/ST General Clauses Act, while reserving candidates for the post of Village Panchayat Board Presidents for the Ammapettai Panchayat Union/fifth respondent.) V.M. Velumani, J. 1. This Writ Petition has been filed in public interest to call for the records relating to the impugned G.O.(Ms)No.102, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (PR-1) Department, dated 16.09.2016, issued by the second respondent and to quash the same and also a consequential direction to the fourth respondent to pass G.O. by following the provisions contained in the SC/ST General Cla...
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 21.03.2016 made in M.C.O.P.No.220 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Subordinate Judge), Gudiyatham.) 1. It is a case of death of 30 year old permanent employee serving as Setter cum Operator in Ideal Fasteners India Private Limited company, Tambaram, Chennai claiming to have earned a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. However, accepting the monthly salary of the deceased after deduction at Rs.6,230/-, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Gudiyatham has awarded a total compensation of Rs.10,29,704/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation in M.C.O.P.No.220 of 2014. Aggrieved by the impugned award dated 21.3.2016, the Transport Corporation, being held liable for the tortious act of its driver in causing the accident and directing it to pay the com...
N. Sathish Kumar Vs. The Director of School Education, College Road, C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.8372/A1/2005 dated 07.05.2013 and 25.09.2013 and quash the same and further direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds.) 1. By consent of both the parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition to quash the orders of the second respondent dated 07.05.2013 and 25.09.2013 and consequently, direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds. 3. The case of the petitioner is that his father, by name, Nallathambi was working as BT Assistant in Government Higher Secondary School, Edappadi, Salem District and he died on 17.04.2001, while in service, leaving behind him, his wife, son/petitioner herein and mother as legal heirs. At that time, the petitioner was...
A. Sivaram Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, Departme ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents No.2 and 3 to re-fix the petitioner's seniority above the respondent No.4 in the Seniority list of Degree Holders dated 27.11.2006 on the file of the respondent No.3 with all consequential benefits within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to re-fix his seniority above the 4th respondent in the Seniority list of Degree Holders, dated 27.11.2006, on the file of the 3rd respondent with all consequential benefits within the time stipulated by this Court. 2. Heard Mr.T.Lajapathy Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr.Aairam K.Selvakumar learned Government Advocate appearing for first respondent and Mr.S.Baskaran, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice i...
K. Mangalakshmi Vs. The Secretary to Government, Public Welfare and Fa ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records and quash the impugned order issued by the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.264/ep3/07 dated 25.06.2007 and the 3rd respondent's order in Na.Ka.No.260/ep3/07 dated 27.06.2007 and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service from 01.07.2007.) 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus or any other Writ, or order, or direction, in the nature of a Writ to call for the records and quash the impugned order issued by the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.264/ME.3/07 dated 25.06.2007 and the 3rd respondents order in Na.Ka.No.260/ME.3/07 dated 27.06.2007 and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the Petitioner in service from 01.07.2007. 2. It is the case of the petitioner is that her husband Kaliyamoorthi had worked in the government hospital at Kumbakonam a...
R. Vimala and Another Vs. S. Manivannan and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(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 I.A.No.327 of 2015 in I.A.No.173 of 2015 in O.S.No.99 of 2013, dated 30.10.2015, on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Trichy.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to set aside the fair and decretal order made in I.A.No.327 of 2015 in I.A.No. 173 of 2015 in O.S.No.99 of 2013, dated 30.10.2015, on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Trichy. 2. The respondents herein filed O.S.No.99 of 2013 before the III Additional District Court, Trichy, for the relief of recovery and for possession. In the aforesaid suit, the Petitioners were set ex-parte on 12.03.2014. As the Petitioners/defendants have not filed written statement, the said suit was decreed ex-parte on the same date. Thereafter, the Petitioner has filed an application in I.A.No.173 of 2015 to condone the delay in filing the petition to set...
Lalitha Gowrinath Vs. The Commissioner of Police, E.V.K. Sampath Salai ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents, their men and subordinates not to disturb the petitioner in any manner pertaining to her construction activities at Door No.5, 12th Cross Street, New Colony, Chromepet, Chennai 600 044 and directing the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards the damages incurred by the petitioner from the third respondent police.) 1. This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents, their men and subordinates from disturbing the petitioner in any manner pertaining to her construction activities at Door No.5, 12th Cross Street, New Colony, Chromepet, Chennai - 600 044 and further, directing the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards the damages incurred by the petitioner from the third respondent police. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their name. 3. It is the case of Lal...
S. Murugan and Others Vs. The District Collector, Ramnad District
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned notice dated 08.07.2008 issued by the 3rd respondent bearing Na.Ka.No.A2/1084/2008 and quash the same.) Prayer: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, restraining the respondents 1 to 3, their men, agents or any other person on their behalf from evicting the petitioners.) Common Order M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. The Petitioners in W.P.(MD)No.7298 of 2008 would claim among other things that their residents of land fall within the Survey Nos.632 and 633, situated at Rameshwaram. It was originally classified as Government Poramboke land and latter on, the petitioners and other persons had occupied the same. According to the petitioners, many of such occupations were recognized by the Government itself and pattas have also been issued in favour of some other person...
K.S. Muthu Vs. The District Collector, Office of the District Collecto ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-04-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to operate Bath Room opposite to ward No.110, Madurai Rajaji Hospital, which was allotted to the petitioner by the hospital authorities as per the direction of the first respondent on 27.08.2010, by considering the representation preferred by the petitioner dated 17.08.2011 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. This writ petition has been filed seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to operate Bath Room opposite to ward No.110, Madurai Rajaji Hospital, which was allotted to the petitioner by the hospital authorities as per the direction of the first respondent on 27.08.2010, by considering the representation preferred by the petitioner dated 17.08.2011 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court. 2. Heard Mr.S.Malaikani, learn...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »