Chennai Court November 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.
Mottaiyandi Chettiar (Died) and Others Vs. Saroja and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer: Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 21.12.1993 made in O.S.No.66 of 1992 by the learned Sub Judge, Ramanathapuram.) 1. The defendant in the suit in O.S.No.66 of 1992 on the file of the Sub Court, Ramanathapuram, is the appellant in this appeal. Since the appellant died during the pendency of this appeal, his legal representatives namely appellants 2 to 8 are prosecuting this appeal. The first respondent in this appeal is the plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No.66 of 1992. The first respondent also died during the pendency of this appeal. The second respondent namely the husband of the first respondent was brought on record, as the legal representative of the deceased first respondent. The second respondent also died subsequently and the third respondent in the appeal was brought on record as the legal representative of the deceased second respondent on the basis of a Will alleged to have been executed by the second resp...
R. Nagarathinam and Another Vs. T. Valli and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2004 made in MCOP.No.1776 of 2001 on the file of the First Additional District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madurai.) Judgment: 1. It is the unfortunate case of fatal accident took place on 06.11.2000 around 14.15 hours on Cuddalore-Pondy main road. The legal heirs of the deceased filed an application seeking compensation before the First Additional District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madurai, and the Tribunal considering the facts and the circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.1,55,000/- as total compensation with interest at 9% per annum. Challenging the award, the appellants/claimants preferred this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal is very meagre and in fact, the deceased was working as a Chef in a Non-Vegetarian Hotel and was drawing salary of Rs.4...
Chettiar Podhuvudai Swamimalai represented by its Trustee C. Panchanat ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to set aside the fair and decretal order passed in I.A.No.34 of 2016 in O.S.No.294 of 2011, dated 4.6.2016, on the file of the I Additional District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to set aside the fair and decretal order passed in I.A.No.34 of 2016 in O.S.No.294 of 2011, dated 4.6.2016, on the file of the I Additional District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam. 2. According to the Petitioner, the petitioner herein has filed the above suit in O.S.No.294 of 2016 for eviction and to pay the arrears of rent and for other reliefs. In the aforesaid suit, the respondent herein was set exparte and an exparte decree was passed and hence the respondent herein filed I.A.No.34 of 2016 to condone the delay of 13 days in filing the application to set aside the exparte decree in the main suit. According to the revision petitioner, in the main suit, writt...
C. Kuppusamy and Others Vs. Govindasamy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer: Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the fair and decretal order dated 13.08.2016 made in I.A.No.634 of 2015 in O.S.No.230 of 2015 on the file of the learned Second Additional District Judge, Erode.) 1. This civil miscellaneous appeal has been directed against the impugned decretal order dated 13.8.2016 passed in I.A.No.634 of 2015 in O.S.No.230 of 2015 by the learned Second Additional District Judge, Erode, complaining that when the first respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for partition, separate possession, declaration, permanent injunction and other reliefs, during the pendency of the partition suit, the Court below, while entertaining the interlocutory application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code by the first respondent/plaintiff, has wrongly granted an order of ad-interim injunction stating that the first appellant/second defendant has ventured to exe...
Lakshmi Vs. Pandian and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer:-Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the fair and decreetal order in MCOP.No.16 of 2007, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramanathapuram, dated 11.04.2008.) The appellant has filed the present C.M.A(MD)No.937 of 2008, challenging the award passed inMCOP.No.16 of 2007, dated 11.04.2008, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramanathapuram. 2. It is a case of an injury caused in an accident took place on 13.11.2006 at about 09.00 hours near Pamban Panchayat Office on the Madurai-Rameswaram National Highways. The injured victim has filed an application seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramanathapuram, in MCOP.No.16 of 2007. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal awarded Rs.61,000/- as total compensation. The liability was fixed only against the owner of the vehicle...
The Branch Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 66, Trichy Vs. P. Ta ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 19.09.2006 and made in M.C.O.P.No.1681 of 2004, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub Court, Trichy and praying to set aside the same.) Judgment: 1. The appellant/New India Assurance Company has filed the present C.M.A(MD)No.211 of 2008, challenging the award passed in MCOP.No.1681 of 2004, dated 19.09.2006, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub Court, Trichy. 2. It is a case of a fatal accident occurred on 27.12.2003 at about 12.10 a.m. near Cavery New bridge, Trichy. The legal heirs of the deceased filed an application seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub Court, Trichy in MCOP.No.1681 of 2004. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal awarded Rs.10,83,200/- as total compensation. Challenging the same, the appellant/New India Assurance Com...
The Manager, The United India Insurance Company Ltd., Karur Vs. Dhanra ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 31.08.2005 made in M.C.O.P.No.88 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karur.) 1. The appellant/United India Insurance Company Ltd., filed the present C.M.A.(MD)No.120 of 2007, challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.88 of 2004 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karur. 2. It is a case of injury caused due to the accident that took place at about 9.30 p.m. on 06.07.2003 opposite to Annapoorna Hotel at Karur Salem By Pass Over Bridge. The injured victim filed application seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karur and the Tribunal considering the facts and circumstances of the case awarded Rs.1,51,500/- towards total compensation and challenging the same, the appellant United India Insurance Company filed this appeal on the groun...
M. Selvam and Others Vs. Ramaiah and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.215 of 2014 in O.S.No.16 of 2014, dated 30.6.2015, on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court,Manamadurai and allow the I.A.No.215 of 2014 in O.S.No.16 of 2014 and take on the set aside petition on file for adjudication on merits and in accordance with law after affording an opportunity to the Petitioners to adduce evidence.) 1. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 20.10.2016 and 10.11.2016, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioners and hence the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for dismissal'. Even today also, there is no representation for the Petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondents is present. 2. In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.24.11.2016...
G. Sathish Bhatia Vs. N.S. Gnaneswaran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
K.K. Sasidharan, J. 1. The petitioner filed an Application before the learned Rent Controller to implead him as a party to the Rent Control Original Petition, on the ground that he is in possession of the schedule premises. 2. The learned Rent Controller was of the view that the lease was not given to the petitioner, and as such, he is not a necessary party. The Impleading Petition was, therefore, dismissed. The said Order is under challenge in this Civil Revision Petition. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner produced voluminous documents before the learned Rent Controller to show that he has been in possession and enjoyment of the property. In spite of those documents, the learned Rent Controller passed an order, dismissing the Application. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent justified the order passed by the learned Rent Controller. According to the learned counsel, there is no privity of contract between the landlord and t...
The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. M. Chitra Devi and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-24-2016
(Prayer:Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree in M.C.O.P.No.3 of 2012, dated 31.01.2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Theni.) Common Judgment 1. All the appeals are connected and an unfortunate accident took place on 19.06.2010 at about 09.45 hours at Bodi Mettu road. The injured claimants filed applications seeking compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Theni and the Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, granted compensation to all the injured victims. 2. The appellant/The New India Assurance Company preferred the present appeals mainly on the ground that in respect of the vehicle which met with the accident, the appellant Company issued Act only policy and the same will not cover the third persons travelling in a private Jeep. 3. The vehicle which met with the accident is a Jeep bearing registration No.KL-10-A-3962 and the ve...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »