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.
Lawrance Vs. The Inspector of Police, Kumbakonam West Police Station
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Judgment and conviction dated 27.02.3013 made in S.C.No.232 of 2011 on the file of the learned First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.232 of 2011, on the file of the learned First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur. He stood charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. By Judgment dated 27.02.3013, the Trial Court convicted the appellant, as detailed below:- Section of LawSentence of imprisonmentFine amount302To undergo imprisonment for life.Rs.500/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant has come up with this Criminal Appeal. 2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:- The deceased, in this case, was one Mrs.Kannalagi. The accused is her husband. The marriage between them was ...
Shriram Epc Limited Chennai Vs. Soma Enterprises Limited, Pune
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: This Civil Suit is filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules and Order VII Rule 1 of CPC read with Sections 27, 29, 134 and 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.) 1. This civil suit is filed by the Plaintiff to pass a judgement and decree, against the Defendant: a. granting permanent injunction restraining the Defendant and its men, from in any manner, infringing the plaintiff's registered trademark, containing the mark/expression/slogan 'ENGINEERING THE FUTURE' and any mark that is similar/deceptively similar to the said mark. b. granting permanent injunction restraining the Defendant and its men, from in any manner, from using or applying the mark/expression/slogan 'ENGINEERING THE FUTURE' or any deceptively similar trademark to that of the Plaintiff's mark and from passing off their goods and services of their business as that of the business of the Plaintiff. c. directing the Defendant to render accounts of profit made by the Defendant by the use of similar/decept...
S. Renugadevi Vsersu M. Vijaykumar
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code to withdraw the F.C.O.P.No.177 of 2016 pending on the file of Family Court, Erode and to transfer the same to the file of I Additional Sub Court, Madurai (Camp at Melur) to be tried along with H.M.O.P.No.289 of 2016.) 1. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent had been solemnized on 12.12.2000 as per the Hindu rites and customs at Palani and out of the wedlock a male child was born on 21.03.2012 and thereafter the petitioner and respondent developed misunderstanding and accordingly the petitioner left the matrimonial home and now residing with her parents and living with their support and looking after the minor child. The Respondent filed F.C.O.P.No.177 of 2016 before the Family Court, Erode. The contention of the petitioner is that now she is living with her parents at Madurai and she has to look after her minor child and further she has filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.289 of 20...
Bhathma Vs. The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Prohibit ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records connected with the detention order of the respondent No.2 in Cr.M.P.No.07/2016, dated 06.04.2016 and quash the same and direct the respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu by name Deepak @ Manju, S/o.Sekar, aged 24 years, now detained at Trichy Central Prison before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The petitioner is the mother of the detenu viz., Mr.Deepak @ Manju S/o.Sekar, aged bout 24 years. The detenu has been detained, as per the order of the second respondent, dated 01.04.2016, under Section 2(f) of the Tamilnadu Act 14 of 1982, branding him as Goonda . Challenging the same, the petitioner has come up with this Habeas Corpus Petition. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents. We have also perused th...
N. Venkatachalapathy Vs. Aynex Mary and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 10.11.2000 made in M.C.O.P.No.163 of 1997 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional Subordinate Judge) Trichy. Prayer:-Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 10.11.2000 made in M.C.O.P.No.519 of 1997 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional Subordinate Judge) Trichy.) Common Judgment 1. The present civil miscellaneous appeals have been filed challenging the common award passed in M.C.O.P.Nos.163 of 1997 and 519 of 1997 dated 10.11.2000 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional Subordinate Judge) Trichy. 2. The accident took place on 24.12.1995 at about 23.45 hours. When the deceased was proceeding on a TVS 50 on Tiruchy Manapparai Main Road from West to East, the lorry belonging to the first respondent bearing R...
K. Senthilkumar Vs. The Director of Library Mount Road, Chennai and Ot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in impugned order in m3/2077/2012, dated 20.04.2012 issued by the 3rd respondent, quash the same and further direct the 3rd respondent to sponsor the petitioner to the post of Village Librarian to be appointed by the 2nd respondent in Tuticorin District forthwith.) Order: 1. This writ petition has been filed to challenge the impugned order, dated 20.04.2012, issued by the third respondent and for further direction to the 3rd respondent to sponsor the petitioner to the post of 'Village Librarian' to be appointed by the 2nd respondent in Tuticorin District forthwith. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he has completed 12th Standard and he has completed the Course of Certificate in Library and Information Science (CLIS) as early as 1998. He belongs to Schedule Caste Community. He has registered his name with the 2nd respondent on 24.06.1992 and h...
V. Ravichandran Vs. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tiru ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order made by the 1st respondent in his proceeding in A6/3532/2015 dated 22.08.2015 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially direct the respondents to close down the TASMAC liquor to vending shop (Shop No.10862) in petitioners village within the time that may be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The petitioner, at the time, when he filed the present writ petition, was the President of a Village President known as Kalingapatti Village Panchayat, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. According to him, the said Village consists of people belonging to different communities and drawn from different walks of life. It is alleged that in the year 2002, there was a proposal by the Government to establish a liquor vending shop in Kalingapatti Village. It was not to the liking of the people...
C. Rani Malathy Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, Dep ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the files of the fourth respondent pertaining to his order bearing Na.Ka.No.6406/A2/2016 dated 26.10.2016 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner as School Assistant (Maths) in the fifth respondent school with effect from the date of appointment on 10.06.2013 with all attendant benefits within a stipulated time that may be prescribed by this court by considering the proposal resubmitted by the fifth respondent dated 08.11.2016.) 1. This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus praying to quash the order of the fourth respondent bearing Na.Ka.No.6406/A2/2016, dated 26.10.2016 and consequently to direct the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner as School Assistant (Maths) in the fifth respondent school with effe...
Ayyappan Vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police, Harithuvaramangalam Po ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal, filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgement, dated 18.02.2015, passed in S.C.No.18 of 2013, on the file of the Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram, (Fast Track Mahila Court) Tiruvarur.) 1. The Appellant/Accused has preferred the instant Criminal Appeal before this Court, (as an aggrieved person) as against the judgment, dated 18.02.2015, made in S.C.No.18 of 2013, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram, (Fast Track Mahila Court) Tiruvarur/Trial Court. 2. The Trial Court, while passing the impugned judgment on 18.02.2015, in S.C.No.18 of 2013, at Para No.25, had among other things observed as follows:- " .... It is proved by the prosecution that the accused made harassment on the score of issue-less to his wife. The above harassment on the score of issue-less definitely amount to mental cruelty on the deceased. Further, the above such cruelty is such a nature to drive the deceased to commit a suicide ...
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Represented by its Branch Manager, Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-16-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the common order dated 13.12.2001 made in M.C.O.P.No.680 of 1993 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional Subordinate Judge) Madurai.) Common Judgment: All the appeals have been filed challenging the common award passed in M.C.O.P.Nos.184, 186 to 189 and 680 of 1993 dated 13.12.2001. 2. When the claimants were travelling in a Van bearing registration No.TN.57/5774 belonging to the 2nd respondent, due to the rash and negligent driving, the driver was unable to control the speed, and consequently, the van collapsed. Hence, all the claimants, who were travelled in the Van sustained injuries. The victims/injured persons filed petitions seeking compensation. The Tribunal considering the facts and circumstances of the case awarded compensation to the victims. The New India Assurance Company Limited preferred these appeals challenging the common award passed by the Tribunal...
- ‹ Prev
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- Next ›
- Last »