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.
Ondimuthu @ N.O. Muthu Vs. Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswar
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of C.P.C., to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 15.09.2016 passed in E.A.No..... of 2016 in E.P.No.440 of 1990 in O.S.No.123 of 1970 on the file of the 1st Additional Sub Judge, Madurai.) 23/11/2016 1. This civil revision petition arises against the order dated 15.09.2016 passed in E.A.No..... of 2016 in E.P.No.440 of 1990 in O.S.No.123 of 1970 on the file of the 1st Additional Sub Judge, Madurai. 2. The respondent temple filed a suit in O.S.No.123 of 1970 before the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, for the relief of delivery of possession and for mesne profits. The said suit was decreed on 23.12.1978. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, appeals were filed in A.S.No.209 of 1979 and 9 of 1980 before this Court and the said appeals were also dismissed on 12.02.1986. Sixth defendant in the suit has filed a petition in Review C.M.P.No.3891 of 1986 in A.S.No.209 of 1979 and the same was allowed on ...
The New India Assurance Company Limited, Theni Vs. Annanthammal and An ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgement and decree dated 15.03.2005, passed in MCOP.No.205 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,(Additional District Judge/ Fast Track Court) Tuticorin.) 1. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the judgement and decree dated 15.03.2005, passed in MCOP.No.205 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Additional District Judge/ Fast Track Court), Tuticorin. 2. It is a case of injury caused due to the accident took place on 21.02.1999, near Sivakalai Road. The injured victim filed a claim petition in MCOP.No.205 of 1999 seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Tuticorin, and the Tribunal by considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded a sum of Rs.73,200/- as total compensation. Challenging the same, the appellant/insurance company preferred this appeal, mainly o...
Kandan and Another Vs. Govindasamy and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-23-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 16.02.2015 made in E.A.No.180 of 2014 in E.P.No.237 of 2011 in O.S.No.498 of 2003 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Thiruvannamalai.) 1. Challenging the fair and final order passed in E.A.No.180 of 2014 in E.P.No.237 of 2011 in O.S.No.498 of 2003 on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Thiruvannamalai, the judgment debtors-defendants have filed the above Civil Revision Petition. 2. The respondents-plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.498 of 2003 for the following reliefs:- (i) declaration, recovery of possession and mandatory injunction in respect of 1st item of the suit property ; and (ii) declaration and permanent injunction in respect of 2nd item of the suit property. 3. After contest, the Trial Court decreed the suit by declaring the title of the plaintiffs to an extent of 2.23 cents in 1st item of the suit property and 2 cents i...
R. Subramanian Vs. The Director of Pension and Others
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 Certiorarified Mandamus callingfor the records connected with impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings O.Mu.No.51885/Ka Pi 1/3/2016 dated 16.06.2016 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1strespondent to reimburse Rs.67,522/- (Rupees Sixty seven thousands five hundred twenty two only) being the actual medical expenditure incurred by the petitioner for the treatment given to the petitioner's wife for the Tumor in Spinal Cord diagnosed as MENINGIOMA, TRANSITIONAL TYPE (WHO Grade I) D11-D12 level spinal at the Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Science and Technology, Trivandrum within a specified period.) 1. This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus praying to quash the impugned order of rejection of medical reimbursement passed by the second respondent in his proceedings O.Mu.No.51885/Ka Pi 1/3/2016 date...
M. Subramani Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police, Edapadi Police Sta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal revision is preferred under Sections 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., against the judgment, dated 6.4.2010 made in C.A.No.13 of 2010 by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.2), Salem, confirming the judgment, dated 16.12.2009 made in C.C.No.80 of 2008 by the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sankagiri.) The revision petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.80 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sankagiri, Salem District. 2. In the said Court, the accused has been prosecuted for an offence under Section 304-A IPC. 3. The case of the prosecution briefly runs as under:- (1) On 27.9.2007, at about 7 a.m., on the Samuthiram-Panickanoor Road, the accused came driven the Government Bus TN-27-N-1220 from North to South. At about that time, one Ravi came driven his Motorcycle TN-24 9024 from the opposite side, from South to North. Near Muniyappasamy Temple, the road turns a little and proceed towards the Western side and then proceeds to Samuthiram. At ...
A. Velappan Pillai Vs. R. Sudhakaran Pillai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to call for the documents pertaining to the decree and judgment passed by District Judge, Kanyakumari at Nagercoil in A.S.No.39 of 2008, dated 09.06.2009 confirming the decree and judgment of learned Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuram in O.S.No.1 of 2007, dated 03.10.2007 and may set aside the same.) 1. The defendant in the suit is the appellant in the above second appeal. The respondent herein filed a suit in O.S.No.1 of 2007 on the file of the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram, against the appellant herein for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,36,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the principal sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. 2. The case of the plaintiff/respondent is that the defendant / appellant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the plaintiff / respondent on 28.12.2003 agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. It is also the case of the plaintiff / respondent that in evidence of ...
Chinna Ovu Reddiar and Others Vs. Sankarankoil Taluk
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 09.07.2010 passed in A.S.No.20 of 2009 and Cross Objection on the file of the Sub Court, Sankarankoil, modifying the judgment and decree dated 21.01.2009 passed in O.S.No.95 of 2007 and Counter Claim on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Sankarankovil.) 1. The defendants in the suit in O.S.No.95 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Sankarankovil, are the appellants in this second appeal. 2. The plaintiff / respondent in this second appeal is a temple known as Sankarankovil Mesiapuram Village Pillaiyarkovil represented by its Thakkar. 3. The plaintiff / respondent temple filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants / appellants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff temple. The suit property is an extent of 16 ares in Survey No.743/9 in Vannikonenthal Village, Mesiapuram Majar...
Navakumar and Another Vs. Senthil @ Senthilkumar and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2005 passed in MACOP.No.471 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Karur.) Common Judgment 1. The unfortunate accident took place on 27.02.2002 on Karur to Erode main road. There are fatal and injuries caused due to the accident and the heirs of the deceased and the injured claimants filed their respective applications before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Karur, seeking compensation and the Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances awarded compensation to the claimants. Challenging the award passed by the Tribunal, these batch of appeals are jointly filed by the owner of the Lorry which met with the accident and its insurer/National Insurance Company Limited. 2. It is the contention of the appellant/National Insurance Company Limited that the Tribunal has committed an error in f...
M. Venkatesa Perumal (deceased) and Others Vs. Union of India Rep by i ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of the writ court dated 19.01.2009 made in W.P.No.12733 of 2005.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this writ appeal is to an order dated 19.01.2009 made in W.P.No.12733 of 2005, by which, the writ court, declined to interfere with the orders dated 27.01.2000 and 04.12.2002 passed by the Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Defence, Department of Pension and AC, New Delhi, respondent No.1 as well as the order dated 03.04.1998 passed by the Commanding Officer/Officer-in-Charge, State of Bihar, respondent No.3 and consequently, refused to issue any direction to grant of disability pension to the appellant (since deceased). Legal representatives are pursuing the claim for disability pension. 2. The appellant (since deceased) joined Indian Army on 06.04.1988 and served for a period of eight years and eight months. While he was serving in 603 ASC Battalion (AM), he was admitted in the Command Hospital (Wes...
The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, West V ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, against the order in W.C.No.190/2002 dated 30.12.2004 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madurai.) Judgment: S.M. Subramaniam, J. 1. One Raju alias Chinna Raju died due to the accident took place on 20.01.2002 about 7.30 hours, arising out of and in the course of employment. The legal heirs of the deceased filed an application in W.C.No.190/2002, seeking compensation before the competent authority under the Workmen's Compensation Act and the competent authority considering the facts and circumstances of the case awarded Rs.2,31,244/- as total compensation. Challenging the award, the appellant United India Insurance Company Limited preferred the present appeal, mainly on the ground that it is an admitted fact through the evidences that the deceased was travelling in the mudguard of the Tractor, which met with the accident. Since the findings of the Tribunal is also unambiguous that t...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »