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.
Baskar @ Paradesi Vs. State by The Inspector of Police, Vadalur Police ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C against the Judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Cuddalore in S.C.No.127 of 2007 dated 31.7.2007.) 1. The sole accused in the Sessions case in S.C.No.127 of 2007 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Cuddalore is the appellant. 2. In the said Court, he was tried for an offence under Section 366-A I.P.C. 3. After trial, the trial Court found him guilty under Section 363 I.P.C. and sentenced him to 5 years R.I. 4. The case of the prosecution briefly runs as under: (1) In Cuddalore District, in Vadalur Taluk, in Mettukuppam, Ramalinga Vallalar International Charitable Trust, runs an Ashram. In this, poor children are provided boarding and lodging. It is being administered by Sivaprakasa Swamigal. Its day-to-day affairs are being attended to by P.W.1. (2) P.W.2, a 15 years old girl along with her two sisters stays in the said Ashram. They have no parents. They are studying in the nearb...
Meivazhi Gopalakrishna Anandar and Others Vs. Meivazhi Subramania Goun ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(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.329 of 2007 in O.S.No.83 of 2007, dated 5.2.2008, on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to set aside the fair and decretal order made in I.A.No.329 of 2007 in O.S.No.83 of 2007, dated 5.2.2008, on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur. 2. According to the Petitioners, the Petitioners have filed a suit in O.S.No.93 of 2007 for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction against the respondents 32 to 34/defendants. In the aforesaid suit, an application was filed by the respondents 1 to 31 to implead themselves as proposed defendants under Order 1 Rule 10(2) and Section 151 of C.P.C and also to raise their objections. They are objecting the plaintiffs to file the suit as representatives of their village(filed the...
Devi Vs. R. Parthasarathy and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 16.07.2012 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.2739 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, XV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) 1. This appeal, at the instance of the Claimant, has been filed seeking enhancement of the compensation. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that while the mother of the appellant, namely, Mrs.Nalini, aged about 65 years, was standing on the G.S.T.Road, Guduvancherry, Urappakkam near a tea stall on 25.7.2009 at about 7.50 A.M., the rider of the Yamaha Motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN 19 4363 belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent hit against her mother, as a result, her mother, who was carrying on her avocation as a vegetable vendor earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month, sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries on 1.8.2009 at about 12....
Thirunavukkarasu Vs. Rajavel
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 22.12.1986 in A.S.No.90 of 1986 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Cuddalore confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No.1895/82 dated 19.09.1985 on the file of the District Munsif, Cuddalore.) 1. The long journey of this litigation instituted in the year 1982 by the plaintiff as indigent is capsulised and narrated below:- 2. The suit properties belong to one Narayanasami Mudaliar. He died leaving his wife, son and two daughters. Kadirvelu Mudaliar, who is the son of Narayanasami Mudaliar later, died issueless leaving behind his wife Thailammal. On 9.12.1949, a partition was effected between Manikammal w/o deceased Narayanasami and her daughter-in-law Thailammal w/o Kadirvelu. As per the terms of the partition deed, marked as Ex A-1 , the Plaint 'A' schedule properties were taken by Manikammal and 'B' schedule properties were taken by Thailammal and 'C' schedule properties were ...
Somasundaram Vs. The Managing Director, Tamilnadu State Transport Corp ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the fair and Decretal Order dated 31.08.2004 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.89 of 2001, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Kulithalai.) 1. The appellant/Oriental Insurance Company Limitedhas filed the present C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2006, challenging the award passed inMCOP.No.81 of 2001, dated 31.08.2004, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Kulithalai. 2. It is a case of an injury caused due to the accident took place on 06.05.2001 at about 14.00 hours in Karur to Trichy Main Road. The injured victim filed an application seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Kulithalai in MCOP.No.81 of 2001. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- alone as total compensation, against which, the appellant/claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement. 3. The findings of t...
N. Duraisamy Vs. C. Natarajan and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 28.11.2005 made in MCOP.No.329 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court No.2, Pattukottai.) 1. It is the case of injury due to the accident took place on 15.09.2004 at about 09.00 p.m near Pattukottai Municipality School. The injured filed an application in MCOP.No.329 of 2004 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court No.2, Pattukottai, and the Tribunal considering the facts and the circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.51,670/- as total compensation with 7.5% per annum. Not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded, the appellant/claimant has preferred the present appeal, for enhancement of compensation. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal has not considered the total medical expenditure and further the amount of Rs.30,000/- granted for partial permanent disability is less and there is...
Sujatha and Others Vs. Rajagopal and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree dated 10.09.2003 made in MCOP.No.92 of 1995 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram.) Judgment: 1. It is the unfortunate case of fatal accident took place on 06.11.1994 around 01.45 p.m on Trivandrum-Nagercoil road. The legal heirs of the deceased filed an application seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram, and the Tribunal considering the facts and the circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.1,67,000/- 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 deceased was a practicing Advocate in the Courts at Nagercoil and Thuckalay and was having 14 years of Bar experience at the time of death and was having a reasonably fair practice and was...
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd., through its Branch Manager Vs. R. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree, dated 11.06.2004, made in M.C.O.P.No.77 of 2002, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.4, Periyakulam at Madurai.) 1. The present case is a case of fatal accident took place on 20.12.2001, around 16.15 hours, near Lakshmipuram Rengaraja Theatre at Theni-Periyakulam main road. The legal heirs of the deceased filed a claim petition seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in MCOP.No.77 of 2002 and after considering the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal, awarded Rs.1,52,700/- as total compensation, with interest at the rate of 9%. Challenging the same, the appellant, Insurance Company preferred this appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 and perused the materials available on record. 3. The learned co...
Merry Vs. Rathinasamy and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the fair and final order in I.A.No.229 of 2003, in M.C.O.P.No.192 of 1999, on the file of the Sub Court, Sivakasi.) 1. The present appeal has been filed challenging the final decree and order passed in I.A.No.229 of 2003 in MCOP.No.192 of 1999, on 02.04.2004. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant is the claimant in MCOP.No.192 of 1999, filed before the Sub Court, Sivakasi and the said MCOP.No.192 of 1999, seeking compensation was dismissed for default on 05.02.2003 and the appellant filed an application in I.A.No.229 of 2003, under Order 9 Rule 9 of C.P.C., to restore the petition on file. The petition for restoration was filed in time and there was no delay. Such being the case, the trial Court ought to have restored the same instead of dismissing the petition. He further stated that every application seeking compensation to be decided on merits and Courts ...
Dr. K. Kathirvelu Vs. G. Renganathan and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to call for the records pertaining to the order of the lower court made in I.A.No.91 of 2008 in O.S.No.599 of 2007, dated 28.10.2010 on the file of the Ist Additional subordinate Judge, Thiruchirappalli and to set aside the same and to allow this application under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C in I.A.No.91 of 2008 by strike down the plaint in O.S.No.599 of 2007 on the file of Ist Additional Subordinate Judge, Thiruchirappalli.) 1. The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Civil Revision Petition itself become infructuous, since the suit itself was dismissed for non-prosecution and has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs....
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »