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.
M. Kanniyappan Vs. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Tiruchirappall ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
V.M. Velumani, J. 1. This Writ Appeal has been filed challenging the order of thelearned Single Judge, dated 23.02.2011, made in W.P.(MD)No.4041of 2006. 2. The appellant/petitioner filed W.P.(MD)No.4041 of 2006 seeking to quash the award dated 30.09.2005, passed by the first respondent in I.D.No.70 of 2002 and to hold that termination of his service by the second respondent by an order dated 02.08.2001 is illegal and also for a consequential direction to the second respondent to pay the appellant the back wages from the date of termination of his service to the date of his superannuation with continuity of his service and other attendant benefits including pension. 3. The facts of the case:- (i) The appellant was working as Conductor in the second respondent Transport Corporation from 30.06.1975. While the appellant was on duty on 28.09.2000 as Conductor in the second respondent Transport Corporation bus, bearing Registration No.TN-55-N-0087 on it's trip from Trichy to Madurai, the Che...
Valliammal and Others Vs. Karuppasamy and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the fair and decreetal order dated 02/09/2005 and made in MCOP. 505/2000 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Palani in so far the finding relating to the liability on the 1st respondent alone is concerned. 1. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 02/09/2005 made in MCOP.No.505/2000 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Palani, in so far as the finding fixing liability on the 1st respondent alone, is concerned. 2. It is the case of unfortunate fatal accident caused due to the accident took place on 05.08.1999 at 7.15 p.m in Ottanchathram-Palani main road and the death occurred on the spot. The legal heirs of the deceased filed an application in MCOP.No.505 of 2000, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub-Court, Palani, and the Tribunal by considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs. 2,...
E. Muthukumar Vs. MangalaLatha
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code and Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, against the decree and judgement dated 03.12.2012 passed in HMCMA.9 of 2011 by Learned IV Addl. District Judge, Thirunelveli, reversing the decree and judgement dated 12.04.2011 passed in HMOP No.95 of 2010 by Learned Principal Sub-Judge Thirunelveli.) Judgment: S.M. Subramaniam, J. 1. On 11.11.2016, there was no representation for the appellant and therefore, Registry was directed to list the appeal on 15.11.2016. Even today, there is no representation for the appellant. Hence, this Appeal is dismissed for non prosecution. No costs. Consequently, M.P(MD)No.1 of 2013 is closed....
National Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Divisional Manager, Tiruchirap ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree in MCOP.No.2729 of 2002 dated 25.08.2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub Court, Tiruchirappali.) Judgment: 1. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree in MCOP.No.2729 of 2002 dated 25.08.2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub Court, Tiruchirappali. 2. It is the case of unfortunate fatal accident took place on 25.04.2002, at 07.30 p.m, on Thanjavur road and the death occurred on the spot. The parents of the deceased filed an application in MCOP.No.2729 of 2002, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub Court, Tiruchirappali, and the Tribunal by considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.4,12,000/- as total compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum. The appellant insurance company has filed the present appeal, challenging the Awar...
Chamber of Commerce and Industries, Rep. by its President, M. Muthu. P ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petitionis filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.A3/12884/14, dated 04.04.2014 on the file of the respondent No.3 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to permit the share autos to operate in the Karaikudi Special Grade Municipality within the time frame fixed by this Court.) Order: S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The petitioner had made an application in the proper form under the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988 and the Rules thereunder, seeking permit for plying a share auto (5 seater) in Karaikudi Town in Sivagangai District. The third respondent, by his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A3/12884/14, dated 04.04.2014, rejected the said application and refused to grant permit. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court with this Writ Petition. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Govinda...
P. Samuthirakani Vs. Muniyandi and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to Set aside the order, dated 01.09.2015 in I.A.No.291 of 2015 in O.S.No.120 of 2009, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Srivilliputhur.) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the order dated 01.09.2015 in I.A.No.291 of 2015 in O.S.No.120 of 2009, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Srivilliputhur. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. By consent of both sides, the petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the petitioner, the respondents 1 to 4 have filed a suit in O.S.No.120/2009, on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Srivilliputhur, against the revision petitioner and the 5th respondent herein. In the aforesaid suit, the revision petitioner has filed a detailed written statement stating that the alleged channel ...
A. Robert Vs. The Regional Transport Officer, Theni
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent in Se.Mu.AA.No.32701/E1/2016 dated 17.10.2016, quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent herein to return the original driving licence of the petitioner bearing Licence No.TN-57 19970004212.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to quash the impugned order dated 17.10.2016 passed by the respondent in Se.Mu.AA.No.32701/E1/2016, by which, the respondent cancelled the licence of the petitioner till its expiry on 28.01.2017 on the allegation that the petitioner drove the school vehicle in a rash and negligent manner on 28.09.2016 and caused injuries on the rider of the two wheeler. The petitioner also sought direction to the respondent herein to return the original driving licence of the petitioner bearing Licence No.TN-57 19970004212. 2. Heard the learned counsel for t...
LSR Enterprises Private Limited, Rep. by its Managing Director Sandeep ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: Petitions filed under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, to sanction the scheme of amalgamation.) 1. These Company Petitions are preferred under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, for seeking a sanction of the scheme of amalgamation concerning LSR Enterprises Private Limited (in short transferor company) and Vastrakala Exports Private Limited (in short transferee company), with effect from 01.04.2015. The scheme of amalgamation (in short scheme) is appended as Annexure '5' to C.P.No.135 of 2016 and Annexure '6' to C.P.No.136 of 2016. 2. The petitioner in C.P.No.135 of 2016 is the transferor company and the petitioner in C.P.No.136 of 2016 is the transferee company. 2.1. I may only note that hereafter the transferor and transferee companies will be collectively, referred to as petitioners. 3. A perusal of the record shows that the petitioners have complied with the prescribed procedure. 3.1. A copy of two (2) separate resolutions of even date, i.e., ...
Karthik Vs. Josephine and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., against the order, dated 26.5.2011 in M.C.No.48 of 2008 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vellore.) 1. This revision is by an husband against his wife and daughter as against grant of maintenance to them by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vellore in M.C.No.48 of 2008. 2. The revision petitioner fell in love with the first respondent. They have become love birds. They exceeded their limit. She became pregnant. There were discussion about their affair. By the time, she was 9 months pregnant. 3. In this backdrop of the matter, on 21.1.2009, at Apostolic Faith Mission, Karasamangalam, Vellore both have married. Subsequently, the second respondent was born. Thereafter, difference of opinion arose between the spouses. They started living separately. The child was with her mother. The first respondent filed M.C.No.48 of 2008 seeking maintenance for herself and for her daughter in the Court of Chi...
Judy, Priyadharshini Vs. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limite ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-15-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the Judgment and Decree made in MCOP.No.1092 of 2004 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Judge), Tirunelveli, dated 28/04/2005.) 1. The case on hand is relating to a fatal accident took place on 26.04.2004 about 05.20 p.m on Tirunelveli Tuticorin main road near Vasavappapuram and the deceased was travelling in a Tata Sumo bearing registration No.TN-69-F-6562, which was collided with the respondent transport corporation Bus bearing registration No.TN-27-N-0858. The legal heirs of the deceased filed an application in MCOP.No.1092 of 2004, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court, Tirunelveli, and the Tribunal by considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.3,87,000/- as total compensation with interest at 9% per annum. The claimants have filed the present appeal, challenging the Award passed by the Tribunal, on the ground that the multip...
- ‹ Prev
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- Next ›
- Last »