Chennai Court December 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.
A. Pannerselvam Vs. The Tamil Nadu Information Communication and Anoth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the first respondent made in case No.34236/MA.tha.tha.thaaa/2014, dated 5.1.2015 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to furnish the informations sought by the petitioner in RTI petition dated 9.7.2014.) 1. This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the first respondent, dated 05.01.2015, and consequently, to direct the second respondent to furnish the information sought for by the petitioner under the RTI Act through petition, dated 09.07.2014. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents. 3. The petitioner through his application, dated 09.07.2014, sought for three informations from the second respondent temple with regard to the number of cases filed by the temple between 2002 and 2012 before the ...
M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Represented through its Divis ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.127 of 2009, dated 25.11.2014, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal IV Additional District Court, Madurai. Cross Appeal filed under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.127 of 2009, dated 25.11.2014, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal IV Additional District Court, Madurai.) Common Judgment M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. The second respondent/Insurance Company in M.C.O.P.No.127 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal IV Additional District Court, Madurai, challenging the negligence and quantum of compensation, in respect of the award and decree dated 25.11.2014, had filed this appeal. 2. The respondents 1 to 3/claimants 1 to 3 are the wife, and two sons of one P.Sennakesavan, who is a resident of Door No. 1-27-1, Anandapuram Nagar First Street, Aruppukkottai and he was emp...
Jaipunnisa and Others Vs. Abdul Jaleel and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 10.12.2007 in A.S.No.46 of 2003 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tiruvarur confirming the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2003 in O.S.No.242 of 2000 on the file of the District Munsif, Thiruvarur. S. A.No.430 of 2011 Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 13.08.2007 in A.S.No.77 of 2005 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tiruvarur confirming the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2005 in O.S.No.114 of 1999 on the file of the District Munsif, Thiruvarur.) Common Judgment S.A.No.429 of 2011 1. The legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff in this second appeal have challenged the judgment and decree dated 10.12.2007 made in A.S.No.46/2003 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Thiruvarur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2003 made in O.S.No.242 of 2000 on the file of the District Munsif Co...
Vijaya and Another Vs. State rep by Inspector of Police, B-3, Fort Pol ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Prayer:Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the learned XVIII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai in S.C.No.171 of 2013 dated 10.08.2016.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are the accused 1 and 2 in S.C.No.171 of 2013 on the file of the learned XVIII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai. Including these appellants, there were totally five accused. All the five accused stood charged for offences punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 of I.P.C. By judgment dated 10.04.2013, the trial Court acquitted the accused 3 to 5 and convicted these appellants / accused 1 and 2 alone under Section 302 r/w Section 149 I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants / accused 1 and 2 are before this Court with this appeal. 2.The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows...
Veeraiah Vs. Kamayee Ammal (Died) and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Common Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the order and decree dated 05.11.2016 made in I.A. Nos.930 and 932 of 2016 in O.S.No.350 of 2006 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Dindigul and to allow the above said Civil Revision petitions.) Common Order: 1. These Civil Revision petitions are filed challenging the order passed by the learned District Munsif, Dindigul, in I.A. Nos.930 and 932 of 2016 in O.S.No.350 of 2006, dated 05.11.2016, dismissing the applications filed to reopen the case and to recall the witness P.W.1 examined on behalf of the respondents/plaintiffs. 2. It is not in dispute that the suit was filed in the year 1986 for partition and this Court had earlier directed the lower Court to dispose of the suit on or before 30.11.2016. However, the Revision petitioner has filed applications in I.A. Nos.930 and 932 of 2016 to reopen the case and to recall the witness of P.W.1, who was examined on be...
S. Kanimani and Others Vs. Nandagopal Pillai and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 12.02.2010 passed in A.S.No.78 of 2007 on the file of the Learned Subordinate Judge at Kancheepuram confirming the judgment and decree dated 25.08.2007 passed in O.S.No.27 of 2003 on the file of the Learned District Munsif Court at Kancheepuram.) 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dated 12.02.2010 passed in A.S.No.78 of 2007 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Kancheepuram, confirming the judgment and decree dated 25.08.2007 passed in O.S.No.27 of 2003 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Kancheepuram. 2. The suit has been laid by the plaintiffs for declaration and permanent injunction. 3. The plaintiffs mainly base their claim to the suit property upon the partition deed dated 22.05.1953 effected between Thangavelu Pillai and his two sons viz., Duraiswamy Pillai and Kistappa Pillai. Duraiswamy Pillai is the fa...
M. Kumari Vs. State by The Inspector of Police, Kanakamma Chatram Poli ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed u/s.372 Cr.P.C., seeking to set aside the judgment of acquittal passed on 20.11.2013 by the I Additional Sessions Judge (FAC), Tiruvallur in S.C.No.139 of 2012.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The second respondent herein, Mr. Babu is the sole accused before the I Additional Sessions Court, Tiruvallur in S.C.No.139 of 2012. He stood charged for the offences under Sections 302 and 326 IPC. By Judgment dated 20.11.2013, the trial Court acquitted the accused from both the charges. Challenging the said acquittal, the appellant, who is the wife of the deceased, has come up with this appeal. 2.The case of the prosecution in brief, is as follows:- (a) The deceased in this case was one Mr. Manokaran. P.W.1 was running a cool drink shop at Pudhu Pannapakkam near Indian Overseas Bank. On 01.05.2009 at 12.30 p.m P.W.1 was in the Shop looking after the business. The deceased had just come to the shop. It is alleged that at that time, the accused poured petrol on the deceased and set fir...
Trans Corporate Advisory Services (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 30.03.2016 reopening the assessment for the year 2009-2010 and the order dated 16.11.2016 rejecting the objections filed by the petitioner on the reasons for reopening. 2. The petitioner is a Private Limited Company stated to be engaged in the business of Corporate Advisory, Commission and Real Estate. The return of income for the assessment year 2009-2010 was filed on 26.09.2009 disclosing a loss of Rs.25,81,247/-. The petitioner during the said assessment year had issued 1,40,000 shares which according to the petitioner were compulsory convertible cumulative preference shares at a premium of Rs.240/- per share. The return of income was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and an intimation was issued to the petitioner on 29.03.2011. Subsequently, the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was rectified and an order u...
K. Masi Asari Vs. The District Collector, Dindigul District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarifed Mandamus calling for the records relating to the Proceedings made in Na.Ka. No. 5629/14/A1 enquiry notice, dated 09.01.2015 on the file of the 3rd Respondent herein and quash the same and further direct the 3rd respondent herein to refer the matter to 2nd respondent herein for further enquiry within the stipulated period as maybe fixed by this Court.) 1. There was no representation for the petitioner on the earlier occasion, when the matter was listed on 19.02.2015. Today also, there is no representation for the petitioner. The fifth respondent filed a counter affidavit. 2. The petitioner challenges the enquiry notice calling upon the petitioner to attend an enquiry proposed to be held on 09.02.2015. Now, the counter affidavit filed by the fifth respondent indicates that in pursuant to such an enquiry, an order also came to be passed on 01.04.2016 by the third respond...
Arulmigu Ulageswaraswamy and Varadaraja Perumal Temples, Tirupur Town, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-07-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 29.09.2009 made in A.S.No.14 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, Thiruppur District, Thiruppur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2008 made in O.S.No.331 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsiff Court, Thiruppur.) 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 29.09.2009 made in A.S.No.14 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Thiruppur confirming the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2008 made in O.S.No.331 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruppur. 2. The suit has been laid for declaration and permanent injunction. 3. The averments contained in the plaint filed by the plaintiffs, in brief, are as follows: The suit properties are the ancestral and joint family properties of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs' great grandfather one Muthugounder S/o Palanigounder had purchased ...
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »