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.
The Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Virudhunagar Vs. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the fair and decretal order dated 28.06.2002, made in MCOP.No.326 of 1998, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court, Sivagangai.) 1. The case on hand is relating to a fatal accident took place on 09.09.1996, about 2.00 p.m. on Sivaganga - Melur Main Road, near Ajees Nagar. The legal heirs of the deceased filed a claim petition seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.86,800/- as total compensation, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Challenging the same, the appellant Oriental Insurance Company has filed the present appeal, on the ground that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger and not covered under the policy condition and therefore the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and th...
K. Muralidharan Vs. The Chief Manager Repco Home Finance Ltd. and Anot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
S. Manikumar, J. Challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 27.09.2016 in S.A. No.256 of 2013 passed by the 2nd respondent Debts Recovery Tribunal -III, Chennai, confirming the order dated 10.09.2013 made in CMP No.825 of 2013 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjavur at Kumbakonam. 2. On 08.11.2016, we have passed the following order :- "Order dated 27.09.2016 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal No. III, represented by its Registrar, Anna Salai, Chennai-2, in S. A. No. 256 of 2013, is assailed on the grounds, inter alia, that when the writ petitioner/borrower in the above said appeal, has categorically challenged the order dated 10.09.2013 made in CMP No. 825 of 2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjavur at Kumbakonam, as without jurisdiction, in the light of the well settled judicial pronouncements of this Court in K. Arokiaraj and Ors. v. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srivilliputhur, Viruthunagar and Other, reported in 2013 (6) MLJ 641. The Tribunal without ...
Dr. S. Vetrivel Chezian Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. By its Secre ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records leading to the issue of G.O. (D) No.217 Health and family welfare (A1) Department dt 24.3.2005 and G.O.(D) No.987 Health and Family welfare (A1) Department dt 20.8.2008 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same in so far as the promotions of the 4th and 5th respondents alone is concerned and consequently direct the 1st respondent to promote the petitioner herein to the post of Associate Professor in Orthopaedics in any one of the Government Medical Colleges in the State of Tamilnadu.) The prayer in the writ petition is for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the entire records leading to the issue of G.O. (D) No.217 Health and Family Welfare (A1) Department, dated 24.3.2005 and G.O.(D) No.987 Health and Family Welfare (A1) Department, dated 20.8.2008 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the sam...
Godwin Gells Vs. Kamali Hepzibah
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, to set aside the impugned order and decree passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thoothukudi, in I.D.O.P.No.172 of 2015, dated 23.11.2015 by allowing this appeal.) 1. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the impugned order and decree passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thoothukudi, in I.D.O.P.No.172 of 2015, dated 23.11.2015, by allowing this appeal. 2. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 19.02.2014, at St.John's Church, Nazareth. Due to the strained relationship between the parties, they had jointly filed a petition for dissolution of their marriage, by mutual consent, in I.D.O.P.No.172 of 2015, before the learned Principal District Judge, Thoothukudi. 3. When the consent petition was taken up for final hearing, the respondent wife appeared before the Court and stated that she is not willing to give consent for divorce. Recording th...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai Vs. Vasu Chemicals, Madurai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act,1944 to set aside the final order No.157/2005 dated 27.01.2005 passed by Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai in Appeal No.E/960 of 1998 (arising out of Order in Original No.1/98 dated 29.01.1998 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai).) M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. The Revenue aggrieved by the order of remand passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Southern Region Bench, Chennai (in short 'CESTAT') dated 27.01.2005 came forward to file this appeal and it was entertained by this Court on the following substantial questions of law:- a. Whether the Tribunal is justified in remanding the case for denova adjudication, in asmuch as evidence are available to rebut the contention of party that the supply of yellow and green bars are always in the ratio of 5:1 and the said contentions of the assesses are thoroughly discussed in paragrap...
V. Damodharan Vs. Karur Town Cooperative Bank Ltd., Karur and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records in Revision Petition No.1/2011 Sa.Pa. dated 14.12.2012, on the file of the 3rd respondent and quash the same as illegal, ultravires, unconstitutional and capricious and for consequential reliefs.) 1. The writ petition has been filed by the writ petitioner for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records in Revision Petition No.1/2011 Sa.Pa. dated 14.12.2012, on the file of the 3rd respondent and quash the same as illegal, ultravires, unconstitutional and capricious and for consequential reliefs. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not filed any petition before any Court or Forum for the same relief and on same cause of action. As against the impugned order, statute does not provide any appeal. The impugned order cannot be tested or subjected for judicial scrutiny. The petitioner had obtained a loan of Rs.10,00,000/- fro...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Mettupalayam Vs. Rosalin and Ano ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer:-Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, against the award dated 28.12.2005 made in W.C.No.61 of 2004, on the file of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tirunelveli and praying to set aside the same.) The appellant/New India Assurance Company Limitedhas filed the present C.M.A(MD)No.929 of 2006, challenging the award passed inW.C.No.61 of 2004, dated 28.12.2005, on the file of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tirunelveli. 2. It is a case of death occurred on account of Heart Attack sustained by the respondent / claimant during the course of employment. The legal heirs of the employee filed an application seeking compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act before the competent authority and the competent authority awarded Rs.1,97,425/- as total compensation. Challenging the same, the appellant/New India Assurance Company has preferred the present appea...
R. Brintha and Others Vs. The Director of Elementary School Education ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as secondary grade teacher in the fourth respondent school from the date of appointment i.e., from 25.02.2015 and confer all the consequential benefits.) Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as secondary grade teacher in the fourth respondent school from the date of appointment i.e., from 05.12.2014 and confer all the consequential benefits. Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as secondary grade teacher in the fourth respondent school from the date of appointment i.e., from 05.12.2014 and confer all the conseq...
Gunaseelan and Others Vs. Kutchanur Sri Saneeswara Baghavan Temple, Re ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to call for the records in pursuant to the Decree and Judgment passed in A.S.No.7 of 2011 dated 11.11.2011 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Uthamapalayam, confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.246 of 2007 dated 25.06.2010 on the file of the District Munsif, Uthamapalayam and set aside the same.) 1. The defendants 1, 3 and 4 in the suit in O.S.No.246 of 1997 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Uthamapalayam are the appellants in this Second Appeal. 2. The respondent in the appeal as plaintiff has filed the suit in O.S.No.246 of 1997 for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their people from putting up any construction in the suit property and for permanent injunction to remove the brick wall that has been put up by the defendants in the suit property. The suit property is described as a raised platform measuring 20 x 21 feet located in the middle of the propert...
Sheik Mohammed Vs. Sirajudeen and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 18.03.2016 made in I.A.No.120 of 2016 in A.S.No.193 of 2007 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Valliyoor.) This civil revision petition has been filed by the petitioner/defendant,to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 18.03.2016 made in I.A.No.120 of 2016 in A.S.No.193 of 2007. 2. According to the petitioner, the respondents herein filed a suit in 1985 for permanent injunction before the District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli and subsequently, it was transferred to the learned District Munsif, Valliyoor and renumbered as O.S.No.234 of 1988 and further, it was transferred to the learned District Munsif, Nanguneri and renumbered as O.S.No.88 of 1998 before the learned District Munsif, Nanguneri and the relief in the suit was amended as for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction and to delivery of vacant possession of the second schedule...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »