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.
V. Sivakumar Vs. The Director of School Education, School Education De ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the third and fourth respondents from taking any coercive action as against the petitioner's son till the application for equivalence certificate is processed by the first and second respondents.) 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the third and fourth respondents from taking any coercive action as against his son K.S.Somaskandan, till the application for equivalence certificate is processed by the first and second respondents. 2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition that the petitioner's son had completed his IGCSE Grade (International General Certificate of Secondary Education Grade) from Vanshi Manthan Vidyashram in Kottivakkam at Chennai. The said school is affiliated to EDEXCEL, United Kingdom and follows the patten of the said Board. The petitioner states that...
Jothi Vs. Jawahar 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 28.10.2005 passed in MCOP.No.274 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (1st Additional Sub Judge), Tirunelveli.) Judgment: 1. It is the case of an injury caused due to the accident took place on 20.09.1998 about 04.30 p.m on T.B.Road near M.G.R. Colony at Tiruchendur. The injured victim filed an application in MCOP.No.274 of 2004 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 1st Additional Sub Judge, Tirunelveli, and the Tribunal considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.16,000/- as total compensation with interest at 9% per annum. Not satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimant has filed this appeal, for enhancement, on the ground that the Tribunal ought to have calculated the loss of income by applying the multiplier method. Further, the Tribunal had not considered the partial permanent disability and a meagre compensation was a...
Padmavathi Vs. Selvaperumal
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 20.09.2010 passed in MCOP.No.74 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thoothukudi.) 1. It is the case of an injury caused due to the accident took place on 23.08.2009 about 13.30 hours at State Bank Colony, Thoothukudi. The injured victim filed an application in MCOP.No.74 of 2009 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thoothukudi, and the Tribunal considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.1,10,600/- as total compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum. The present appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant, challenging the award passed by the Tribunal, on the ground that the liability was wrongly fixed on the owner of the vehicle, instead of ordering for pay and recovery. The findings of the Tribunal is that the driver, who was driving the vehicle which met with the accident was not...
K. Jeyaraj Vs. Daisy Mery
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 16.03.2006 passed in IDOP No.218 of 2004 on the file of the First Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.) 1. It is represented by the counsels on both sides that the case had been settled before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre on 29.01.2013. In view of the same, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs....
Shobana Vs. S. Shanmugavel and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree in M.C.O.P.No.1779 of 2008, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, V Additional District Judge, Madurai, dated 26.09.2013.) The appellant has filed the present C.M.A(MD)No.963 of 2014, challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.1779 of 2008, dated 26.09.2013, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ V Additional District Judge, Madurai. 2. It is a case of fatal accident caused due to the accident took place on 07.03.2008 at about 16.15 hours in Madurai-Thirumangalam NH-7 Road. The wife of the deceased filed an application seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, V Additional District Judge, Madurai. The Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.6,23,500/- as total compensation. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contends that it is a case of fatal accident and the monthly ...
Periannan Vs. Natesan and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree of the learned Principal District Judge of Erode District at Erode in A.S.No.10 of 2010 dated 30.09.2010 reversing the judgment and decree of the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Gobichettipalayam in O.S.No.19 of 2002 dated 24.07.2009.) 1. The plaintiff in this second appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2010 passed in A.S.No.10 of 2010 by the Principal District Judge, Erode, reversing the judgment and decree dated 24.07.2009 passed in O.S.No.19 of 2002 on the file of the learned Second Additional Subordinate Court, Gobichettipalayam. 2. The suit has been laid for partition. 3. The plaintiff and the defendants 2 to 4 are the sons, the 5th defendant is the daughter and the first defendant is the wife of Ayyavu Nadar. Claiming that the first item of the suit properties is the ancestral property of Ayyavu Nadar, the second item of the suit properties are hi...
National Insurance Company Limited, Jerome Building, Fort Station Road ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
Judgment: S.M. Subramaniam, J. 1. It is the unfortunate case of fatal accident took place on 22.10.2006 about 6.30 p.m near Kottaimedu at Trichy-Chennai National Highway. The legal heirs of the deceased filed an application in MCOP.No.681 of 2004 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, I Additional Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli, and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal awarded Rs.3,84,000/- as total compensation. Challenging the quantum of award, the appellant has preferred the present appeal. 2. The point raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the award of compensation is excessive. To substantiate the same, the appellant is unable to submit a valid ground or point out any error in the findings of the Tribunal. In the absence of a clinching point or an error apparent on the findings of the Tribunal, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of award. Even in the present case on hand, it is a case of fatal accident and the a...
Ganesan Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Kizhakkikadu
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer:Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. against the judgment, dated 06.02.2015, made in S.C.No.106 of 2014, by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in S.C.No.106 of 2014 on the file of the earned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli. The trial Court framed as many as four charges against them as detailed below: Charge Nos.AgainstOffence U/s.1A1 and A2U/s.341 IPC2A1U/s.294(b) IPC3A1 and A2U/s.302 IPC4A1U/s.506(ii) IPC By judgment dated 06.02.2015, the trial Court convicted them under all the charges and sentenced them as detailed below: AccusedConviction U/s.SentenceA1 and A2U/s.341 IPCA1 sentenced to undergo one month simple imprisonment.A1U/s.294(b) IPCTo pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one week.A1 and A2U/s.302 IPCTo undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months...
Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. T. Singaraj 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 16.10.2012 passed in MCOP.No.28 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Judge, Theni.) 1. It is the case of an injury caused due to the accident took place on 02.08.2009 about 08.30 p.m. The injured victim filed an application in MCOP.No.28 of 2010 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Theni, and the Tribunal considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.4,50,000/- as total compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum. The present appeal is filed by the appellant/insurance company, challenging the award passed by the Tribunal, on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to consider the negligence on the part of the 1st respondent/claimant and therefore, the appellant insurance company is not liable to pay compensation. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that it is a case where the 1st respondent/claimant was tra...
Balakrishnan and Another Vs. K.N. Venkatachalam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 21.09.2010 made in A.S.No.49 of 2010 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Erode, reversal of the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2010 made in O.S.No.391 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Erode.) 1. Impugning the judgment and decree dated 21.09.2010 made in A.S.No.49 of 2010 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Erode, reversing the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2010 made in O.S.No.391 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Erode, the defendants have preferred this second appeal. 2. The suit has been laid for permanent injunction. 3. The averments contained in the plaint, in brief, are as follows: The suit property has been obtained by the plaintiff under the partition deed dated 15.10.1990 effected between the plaintiff and his father's brothers and the suit property is an agricultural land. The defendants are running aut...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »