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.
P. Gopinath Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secret ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents not to commit breach of conditions imposed in the District Collector proceedings dated 08.02.2016, and further takes such remedial measures to restore the River bed of the Then Pennai Rive in land S.F.No.499 (P) of Sornavur Keez Paathi Village, Villupuram Taluk and all adjacent areas thereto and further direct the 1st respondent Government to evolve a mechanism by which the River beds in the State of Tamil Nadu can be protected from unscrupulous elements and issue such further or other appropriate orders.) 1. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking recourse to Public Interest Litigation Jurisdiction alleging that there has been indiscriminate quarrying of sand on the riverbed in S.F.No.499 located in Sornavur Keespaathi Village, Villupuram. It is the case of the petitioners that the Thenpennaiyar river flows from Sathanur Dam and the villages affecte...
The Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Pudukottai ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, to set aside the order of the Tribunal of MACT cum Sub Court, Pudukottai made in MCOP No.177 of 2010, dated 18.09.2013 and allow the appeal with costs and render justice. Judgment: S.M. Subramaniam, J. 1. It is a case of injury and the accident took place on 13.05.2010 at about 3 p.m. near Poonayan Kudiirupu. The injured filed an application for compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Sub Court, Pudukottai, in MCOP No.177 of 2010 and the Tribunal considering the facts and circumstances of the case awarded a sum of Rs.1,15,583/- as total compensation. 2. The Oriental Insurance Company preferred the present appeal solely on the ground that it is proved before the Tribunal that the driver, who was driving the vehicle, which met with the accident, was not in possession of any license. If there is no license, the Tribunal ought to have considered the pay any recovery principle. 3. The lea...
Chandramohan Vs. T.P. Marimuthu
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer:Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 12.04.2000 made in A.S.No.30 of 1999 on the file of the Principal District Court, Karur, reversing the Judgment and decree dated 08.12.1997, made in O.S.No.234 of 1996 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Kulithalai.) Judgment: 1. This Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 12.04.2000 made in A.S.No.30 of 1999 on the file of the Principal District Court, Karur, reversing the Judgment and decree dated 08.12.1997, made in O.S.No.234 of 1996 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Kulithalai. 2. The appellant is the plaintiff, who succeeded in the Trial Court, but lost in the first appellate Court. The respondent is the defendant. 3. Facts of the case:- (i) The appellant filed suit in O.S.No.234 of 1996, before the Subordinate Court, Kulithalai, against the respondent, for recovery of a sum of Rs.34,960/-, being the principal sum of Rs.20,000/- togethe...
C. Srinivasan Vs. Nageswari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
S. Baskaran, J. 1. This appeal filed by the husband, challenging the order dated, 30.03.2016 passed by the Principal Family Court, Chennai, in H.M.O.P.No.4357 of 2013 under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called as Act ) whereby, the petition for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce by mutual consent filed by the appellant/husband along with the respondent/wife herein was dismissed. 2. The appellant claims that marriage between himself and respondent herein was solemnized on 20.02.2011 as per the Hindu rites and customs. No children were born out of the wedlock. The appellant/husband states that after the marriage, owing to differences in temperament, habits, tastes, thoughts and increasing incompatibility, the relationship between himself and the respondent/wife deteriorated. Due to repeated quarrels and disputes, they were living separately for more than two years and as they were not able to live together, they mutually agreed and decided to dissolv...
S. Padmavathi Vs. G. Sakthi Saravanan and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.381 of 2012 on the file of IIIrd Additional Sub Judge, Madurai and to transfer the same to Sub Judge, Erode, for conducting joint trial along with the suit in O.S.No.480 of 2013 on his file.) 1. The present petition for transfer is filed to transfer O.S.No.381 of 2012 pending before the III Additional Sub Judge, Madurai to the file of Sub Court, Erode for conducting joint trial along with the suit in O.S.No.480 of 2013. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the suit filed before Madurai Court for recovery of money is filed before the Court which has no jurisdiction. Further the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the Maudrai Court ought not to have numbered the suit for recovery of money filed by the first respondent herein. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the transfer petition by stating that the ...
S. Padmalakshmi Vs. B. Sankar
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-14-2016
(Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure,to withdraw the HMOP No.604 of 2015 from the file of the 1st Additional Family Court, Chennai and transfer the same to Sub Court, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.) 1. This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filedfor transfer of H.M.O.P.No.604 of 2015 from the file of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai, to the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District. 2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 04.05.2012 as per the Hindu Rites and Customs and now the petitioner and the respondent are living separately, due to misunderstanding between them. The contention of the petitioner is that initially the respondent filed HMOP No.4024 of 2013 before the Family Court, Chennai, for restitution of conjugal rights and the same was withdrawn subsequently. Thereafter, the respondent filed HMOP No.604 of 2015 for divorce before the I Additional...
Chidambaram Vs. V. Ravichandran @ Veerappan and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-11-2016
(Prayer: Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 47(e) of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, against the order dated 20.08.2014 made in G.O.P.No.32 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Pondicherry.) 1. The appellant herein, having moved a petition under Section 8(2)(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 read with Section 29(a) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 before the Court below seeking to appoint him as a guardian for the Minor Saimanohar, S/o Chidambaram, born on 23.5.99 and Minor Dhanajeyan, S/o Chidambaram, born on 9.10.2002 and also to grant permission to sell the petition mentioned property to the intending purchaser viz., the first respondent herein unsuccessfully, has come to this Court with the present appeal challenging the decretal order dated 20.8.2014 passed by the Court below dismissing the petition on the ground that the appellant had failed to prove his claim in respect of the minors' interest. 2. Learned cou...
The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Karur Vs. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-11-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Karur in M.C.O.P.No.335 of 2005.) It is a case of injury, which occurred due to the accident that took place on 18.02.2003. The victim sustained grievous injuries and consequently filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karur, claiming compensation of Rs.5 lakhs. The Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, granted Rs.1,22,350/- towards the total compensation. Challenging the same, the United India Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal on the ground of liability and quantum. 2. In respect of the liability, this Court do not find any error on the findings of the Tribunal and the grounds raised in respect of the liability cannot be accepted, in view of the fact that the factum regarding the accident and the injuries ...
Pachiammal and Another Vs. Madheswaran and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-11-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 27.08.2010 made in A.S.No.10 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, at Rasipuram, reversing the judgment and decree dated 26.11.2009 made in O.S.No.56 of 2007 on the file of the District Munsif Court, at Rasipuram.) 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the plaintiffs against the judgement and decree dated 27.08.2010 made in A.S.No.10/2010 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Rasipuram, reversing the judgment and decree dated 26.11.2009 made in O.S.No.56/2007 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Rasipuram. 2. The suit has been laid for permanent injunction. 3. The case of the plaintiffs in brief is as follows: The suit property is a Village Natham land and it was purchased by one Sengoda Achari on 27.09.1941. The first plaintiff is the wife and the second plaintiff is the daughter of S.Kandasamy and S.Kandasamy is the son of Sengoda Achari and as such, a...
M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Cantonment, Tiruchirappalli Vs. P ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-11-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the fair and decreetal order dated 07.03.2005 made in M.C.O.P.NO.2176/2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Tribunal, Additional District Judge, FTC No.II, Trichirappalli.) The unfortunate fatal accident occurred on 02.05.2005 at about 5 a.m. on Trichy Chennai Trunk Road near Vedangur. The death occurred instantaneously on the spot and the mother of the deceased filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Trichy, claiming compensation. The Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, passed an award granting Rs.3,35,000/- as total compensation. Against which, the Insurance Company preferred the present appeal on the ground that the quantum of award granted by the Tribunal is excessive, because the aspect of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased was not fixed by the Tribunal. 2. As per the FIR, the deceased had driven his vehicle b...
- ‹ Prev
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- Next ›
- Last »