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.
R. Valarmathi Vs. The District Collector Ariyalur District, Ariyalur a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records connected with the order dated 27.10.2014 passed by the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.A3 - 13163 2013, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to give an employment to petitioner's son namely R.Chandrasekar on Compassionate grounds to the petitioners.) 1. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records connected with the order dated 27.10.2014 passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.A3 - 13163 2013, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to give an employment to the petitioner's son namely R.Chandrasekar on Compassionate grounds. 3. The petitioner would state that her husband was working as a Village Administrative Officer and he died on 26.07.2002 while he was in service. The petitioner made several representat...
Sakila Parvin Vs. The Director, Directorate of Distance Education, Mad ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-03-2016
(Prayer:Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the letter of 1st Respondent, dated 07-05-2009, and quash the same and directing the Respondents to issue consolidated mark sheet and provisional degree certificate of the petitioner.) 1. It is submitted by the petitioner's counsel that the prayer in this Writ Petition has become infructuous. 2. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs....
S. Baby Francisca Mary Vs. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by by it's Secreta ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-03-2016
(Prayer:Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned Notification No.19/MRB/2012 dated 24-09-2012 and the consequential call letter in Na.Ka.No.38/MSRB/2012 dated Nil-09-2012 issued by the 2nd Respondent and quash the same as illegal insofar as it relates to the stipulation that students who have studied in the list of 8 private institutions alone are eligible to participate in the Certificate Verification is concerned and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to consider the petitioner for the appointment to the post of Village Health Nurse.) Order: 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned Notification No.19/MRB/2012, dated 24-09-2012, and the consequential call letter in Na.Ka.No.38/MSRB/2012, dated Nil-09-2012, issued by the 2nd Respondent and quash the s...
R. Senthil Vs. State rep.by Inspector of Police, Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. against the Judgment dated 27.8.2014 passed in S.C.No.349 of 2011 on the file of Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai.) A. Selvam, J. 1. The conviction and sentence dated 27.8.2014 passed in Sessions Case No.349 of 2011 by the Magalir Sessions Court, Chennai are being challenged in the present Criminal Appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused by name, Senthil, husband of the deceased, by name Nagarani, at the time of the occurrence, worked in Kadamba Shed. He developed illicit intimacy with one Meena. He failed to give salary to the deceased and due to that, the deceased herself has served in a Shed and on 18.2.2011, at about 4 p.m., the accused has demanded Rs.100/- for taking liquor. The deceased has refused to part with the same and due to that, a tussle has arisen between them and the deceased has come down from the house and after some time, the accused has taken her to his house, which situates in t...
C. Kulandaivel and Another Vs. M. Ramya
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-03-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 14.07.2015 made in CA.No.135 of 2014 passed by the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Salem.) 1. The Criminal revision is directed against the order passed by the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Salem made in CA.No.135 of 2014 dated 14.07.2015. 2.The brief facts which are relevant to the facts of the case are as follows :- The present revision respondent has filed complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act before the Judicial Magistrate, Mahila Court, Salem, after hearing both parties, the trial Court allowed the application in CMP.No.717 of 2014. Against which, the present revision petitioners/Kulandaivel and Ambujam filed petition in CMP.No.2083 of 2014 under Section 25 of the Domestic Violence Act, to set aside the order dated 03.01.2014 made in CMP.No.717 of 2014. The trial Court after hearing both sides comes to a conclusion that the household property ...
S. Kumaresan Vs. The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corpo ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-03-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to transfer the petitioner from Bodi Branch to Batlagundu Branch on mercy and humanitarian grounds on the basis of the representation give by the petitioner dated 06.03.2015 within the time stipulated by this Honble Court.) 1. The writ petition has been filed, seeking to direct the respondent herein to transfer the petitioner from Bodi Branch to Batlagundu Branch on mercy and humanitarian grounds on the basis of the representation give by the petitioner dated 06.03.2015 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Assistant on 01.01.1995 under the respondent Corporation; that during 2011, while he was working at Batlagundu Branch, the Manager of the said Branch orally informed him to report for duty at Periyakulam Branc...
The Deputy Chief Engineer, Constructions, Southern Railways, Salem Div ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-03-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to strike off E.P.No.66 of 2016 in L.A.O.P.No.90 of 2011, on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Karur.) 1. This Civil Revision Petition filed seeking to strike off E.P.No.66 of 2016 in L.A.O.P.No.90 of 2011, on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Karur. 2. According to the Petitioner, an award was passed by the learned Sub-ordinate Judge, Karur in L.A.O.P.No.90 of 2011. Being not satisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal, the beneficiaries filed appeal before the Court below. According to the Petitioner, the aforesaid appeal is pending in unnumbered stage. In the meantime, the respondents herein filed the present E.P before the Land Acquisition Tribunal. Against that, the Petitioner has preferred the present C.R.P before this Court to strike of the E.P from the file of the Court below. 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner relied upon...
Jeyabharatham Vs. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Technical Se ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-03-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.C3/8630/2012 dated 17.10.2012 passed by the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to pay the petitioner 18% interest per annum with effect from 02.07.1999 in the light of the order in W.P.No.16665 of 2007 dated 29.03.2010 within a time frame.) 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.C3/8630/2012 dated 17.10.2010 passed by the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to pay 18% interest per annum with effect from 02.07.1999 in the light of the order in W.P No.1665 of 2007 dated 29.03.2010. 2. That the instant writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order of the respondent dated 17.10.12 and consequential directio...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- Next ›