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.
K. Viswanathan and Others Vs. Arulmighu Aadhi Solaiammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the Judgment and decree dated 11.12.2008 made in A.S.No.343 of 2008 and passed by the Hon'ble IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in so far it relates to granting the relief of recovery of possession and damages by confirming the judgement and decree dated 19.09.2007 made in O.S.No.5819 of 2003 and passed by the Hon'ble I Asst. City Civil Court, Chennai.) 1. The defendants have preferred this second appeal impugning the judgment and decree dated 11.12.2008 made in A.S.No.343 of 2008 on the file of the IV Additional City Civil Court, Chennai, in so far as it relates to granting the relief of recovery of possession and damages, confirming the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2007 made in O.S.No.5819 of 2003 on the file of the First Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The suit has been laid for possession, arrears of rent and for damages. 3. The avernments in brief of the plaint are as follows...
Delvin Formulations Privated Ltd., Vs. Peekay Mediequip Ltd. and Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
(Prayer in O.A.No.760 of 2016 : Application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of O.S.Rules read with Section 9(ii)(d) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to grant an order of interim injunction restraining the respondent No.1, its men, agents, representatives, or any other person claiming through or under the Ist respondent from selling medical disposable products such as disposable syrings, needles, infusion sets, face masks and caps under the brand name SEPNIL and IV Cannulae under the brand name of SEPNIFLON, in the territories covered under the Agreement for Exclusive Marketing, Distribution and Selling Arrangement dated 20.07.2015, without obtaining No Objection Certificate from the Applicants pending initiation and disposal of arbitration proceedings between the applicants and respondent No.1 under the Agreement for Exclusive Marketing, Distribution and Selling Arrangement dated 20.07.2015 and Deed of Novation dated 15.09.2015. Prayer in O.A.No.761 of 2016 : Applica...
M/s.National Collateral Management Services Ltd., Rep. By S. Jayaraman ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
1. The Criminal Revision Case is filed to call for the records in Cr.M.P.No.197 of 2015 in C.C.No.63 of 2009 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry, and to revise the same. 2. The case of the prosecution is that: The instant case in RC.9/E/2007-CBI/EOW/CHENNAI was registered on the reference made by the Government of Puducherry. Initially, Shri Mahadevan, Dy.Tahsildar, CS and CA, Puducherry preferred a complaint dated 31.10.2007 to the Superintendent of Police, Food Cell, Puducherry to investigate the case regarding the rice loaded in the railway wagons booked for Bekkavalu, Kakinada, A.P., and also kept at the godowns situated at the premises of M/s.JR Foods and at M/s.MAA Foods at Puducherry suspected to be PDS rice, illegally procured and stored at Puducherry and to take appropriate action. Based on this complaint, Shri N.Ramachandran, Superintendent of Police, Food Cell Police, Puducherry registered a case in Cr.No.29/2007 dated 31.10.2007 u/s.420 IPC r/w. Sec.7(1...
John Kennedy Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police Kallakud ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchy, in S.C.No.130 of 2014 dated 16.02.2015.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.130/2014 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli. He stood charged for the offences under Sections 341 and 302 IPC. By judgment dated 16.02.2015, the trial Court convicted him under both the charges and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offences under Section 302 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one week for the offence under Section 341 IPC. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: The deceased in this case was one Mr.Gopal @ Gopalakri...
M. Panchavarnam Vs. Arthi
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 47 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, against the fair and executable order dated 22.08.2016 passed in GWOP.No.12 of 2013 by the Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram.) 1. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the order dated 22.08.2016 passed in GWOP.No.12 of 2013 by the Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram. 2. The facts in nutshell as narrated by the counsel for the appellant are that the appellant is the father-in-law of the respondent and his only son namely, Palanikumar, married the respondent on 08.09.2011 and out of the wedlock, a male child was born on 11.07.2012. The only son of the appellant died in a road accident on 24.02.2013. After the death of his son, the respondent/daughter-in-law was in the house of the appellant for sometime and thereafter, went to her parents' home. The appellant filed GWOP.No.12 of 2013 before the Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram, seeking custody of the minor child now age...
K. Rajendran Vs. State rep. By Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal revision is filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., aggrieved over the order of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast track Court-I, Poonamallee dated 30.09.2010 passed in Crl.A.No.58 of 2010 confirming the judgment of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Poonamallee dated 21.06.2010 in C.C.No.200 of 2007.) 1. The sole accused in C.C.No.200 of 2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magaistrate No.I, Poonamallee is the revision petitioner. 2. Before the trial Court, he has been prosecuted for offences under Sections 279, 337, 304(A) IPC. 3. To establish the offences, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 13. 4. Appreciating the said evidence, the learned Magistrate convicted and sentenced him as detailed below: Offencesentences279 IPCFined Rs.250/-, i/d for one month S.I.337 IPCFined Rs.250/-, i/d for one month S.I.304(A)One year R.I. and fined Rs.500/- i/d for one month S.I. He has paid the fine amount. 5. The case of the prosecution in brief i...
Murugeswari Vs. The District Collector, (Inspector of Panchayat) Madur ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
(Prayer:Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent, dated 01.10.2012, in proceeding No.Ka.No.50825/2012/Uu.Va.6, so far as the petitioner is concerned and quash the same.) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this court to withdraw this writ petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed....
F. Ashok Kumar Vs. S. Ayub Khan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-10-2016
(Prayer:- This Civil Suit is filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules and Order 37 Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read with Order 34 Rule 15 of CPC and Order VII Rule 1 of CPC.) 1. This civil suit has been filed to pass a judgement and decree, against the Defendant:- a. directing the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff a sum of Rs.31,59,500/- (Rupees thirty one lakhs fifty nine thousand and five hundred only) with interest at 12% per annum on Rs.17,75,000/- from the date of the plaint till the date of realisation, failing which, directing the sale of the mortgaged property more fully described in the schedule and directing appropriation of the sale proceeds towards the decreed amount and if there is any deficit, pass a personal decree against the Defendant for the deficit. b. granting permanent injunction restraining the Defendant from alienating or encumbering the suit property without settling the amounts due to the Plaintiff as claimed in this suit. c. directing the Defendan...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
M. Venugopal, J. 1. Heard Mr.C.Munusamy, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners/ Appellants and Ms.M.F.Shabana, Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the Respondent. 2. The Petitioners/Appellants have preferred the present Criminal Appeal No.744 of 2016 before this Court, as an aggrieved persons, as against the Judgment dated 13.10.2016 in Special S.C.No.228 of 2015 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Villupuram. 3. It comes to be known that the Petitioners/Appellants/A1 and A2 were found guilty in respect of an offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted for the aforesaid offence and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one year each and further, they were directed to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in default of payment of said fine amount, they were directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three m...
Veerasamy Vs. R. Rajeswaran and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-09-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, against the judgment and award dated 20.08.2003 passed in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.595 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (District Court), Perambalur, in so far as the same are against the appellant.) 1. This civil miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 20.08.2003 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.595 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (District Court), Perambalur. 2. The facts of the case are as follows:- On 01.02.2002 at about 8.15 a.m., at Ramanatham to Chennai main road, when the appellant/claimant was travelling in a Mini Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-45-K-216, which belongs to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent, due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver, the lorry met with an accident and in the said accident, the appellant/claimant sustained multiple injuries and he filed a petition in...
- ‹ Prev
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- Next ›
- Last »