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.
Vairakannu @ Thandavarayan and Others Vs. Annakodi and Anothers
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: This Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and decree dated 30.06.2008 made in A.S.No.200 of 2006 on the file of Principal District Judge, Puducherry, by reversing the judgment and decree dated 03.07.1998 made in OS.No.563 of 1996, on the file of the Additional Sub Judge, Puducherry.) 1. The plaintiffs are the appellant before this Court. The suit was filed for declaring that the plaintiffs are the absolute owner of the suit property; for recovery of vacant possession; and for mesne profit. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit property originally belongs to one Duraisamy and after his death, by virtue of inheritance the plaintiff was in possession and enjoyment of the property till 13.03.1994. Whereas, the defendants, claiming himself as purchaser of the property from one Rukmani ammal, has trespassed by into the property with the help of his henchmen on 13.03.1994 leading to police complaint and the present suit for recove...
Sridhar Vs. State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Srivaigundam ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District in S.C.No.50 of 2015 dated 12.02.2016.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are the accused 1 and 2 in S.C.No.50 of 2015 on the file of the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District. They stood charged for offences punishable under Sections 302, 294(B) and 506(ii) I.P.C. By judgment dated 12.02.2016, the Trial Court convicted them under Section 302 I.P.C. alone and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. The trial Court however acquitted them from the charges under Sections 294(B) and 506(ii) I.P.C. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants are before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: 2.1. The deceased in this case was on...
D. Murugan Vs. The Teachers Recruitment Board, represented by its Memb ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent, dated 'Nil', published in the Official Website so far as it declares that the petitioner (Registration No.14.PG.10250126) is not within the cut-off zone and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent herein to award 2 marks to the petitioner for teaching experience and consequently select and appoint the petitioner to the post of PG Assistant (Commerce) in B.C. (General) Category/Physically handicapped category in the selection pursuant to the notification in advertisement No.8 of 2014, dated 07.11.2014.) 1. The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent, dated 'Nil', published in the Official Website so far as it declares that the petitioner (Registration No.14.PG.10250126) is not w...
United India Insurance Company Limited, Through its Branch Manager, Th ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the order and decree dated 28.02.2011, passed in M.C.O.P.No.238 of 2010, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court/Fast Track Court No.II, Thoothukudi, to allow this appeal with cost.) 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the order and decree dated 28.02.2011, passed in M.C.O.P.No.238 of 2010, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court/Fast Track Court No.II, Thoothukudi. 2.It is a case of fatal accident caused on account of an accident took place on 05.09.2009, around 05.00 a.m. near Madurai-Dindigul four way Road. The legal heirs of the deceased filed a claim petition seeking compensation before the Tribunal, Dindigul and the Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances awarded a sum of Rs.16,59,500/-. Challenging the same the appellant United India Insurance Company preferred th...
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kumbako ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to allow this appeal and to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 31.07.2012, passed in M.C.O.P.No.84 of 2010, on the file of the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Pattukkottai.) 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Application has been filed to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 31.07.2012, passed in M.C.O.P.No.84 of 2010, on the file of the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Pattukkottai. 2. It is a case of an injury caused due to the accident took place on 14.04.2009, about 04.00 p.m., opposite to Vikramam Gandhi Matriculation School. The injured victim filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Pattukkottai, in M.C.O.P.No.84 of 2010 and the Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances, awarded a sum of Rs.83,700/- as total compensation. Aggrieved by the award, the appellant Transport Corporation preferred this appeal...
S. Kalaimurugan Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Principal Sec ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent herein in Charge Memo No.26021/EG.3/2014, dated 07.01.2015, the order issued in R.C.No.26021/EG.3/2014, dated 05.06.2015 and the order of the first respondent issued in Government Letter No.6074/E.II(2)/2015-1, dated 06.10.2015 communicated to the petitioner, vide R.C.No.26021/EG.3/2014, dated 07.10.2015 by the second respondent herein and to quash the same and to direct the first respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the appropriate place in panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Industries and Commerce (IC) for the year 2013-2014 and promote him as such with all consequential benefits.) 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent herein in C...
S.S. Shri Selvakumari Vs. The District Collector cum Chairman, Distric ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pursuant to the impugned order passed by the respondents in Na.Ka.Aa.Na. 2/16574/2011, dated 16.07.2012 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.) M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. The petitioner challenges the impugned order of the first respondent Committee dated 16.07.2012, in and by which, the Community Certificate given to the petitioner that she belongs to Hindu Adi Dravidar Scheduled Caste community has been cancelled. 2. The petitioner would state that after completing her Higher Secondary Course, she joined M.B.B.S., Course at Madurai Medical College and successfully completed the same and thereafter, she temporarily worked as a Contract Doctor in Southern Railway Hospital till 2007 and she participated in the selection process and got recruited as Assistant Surgeon under Rule 10(a)(i) of the General Rule for Tamil Nadu State and Subordinat...
Alamelu Mangathai Vs. The District Collector and District Magistrate, ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the records of the first respondent in detention order in M.H.S.Confdl.No.67/2016, setting aside the order of detention passed by the first respondent herein setting the detenu by name Alagarsamy alias Petharaj, S/o.Alagarsamy, aged about 46 years, at liberty now detained in Central Prison, Palayamkottai.) M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. The petitioner is the mother of the detenu and aggrieved by the impugned Order of Detention passed by the first respondent, branding him as "Goonda", vide impugned order dated 08.06.2016, in his proceedings in M.H.S.Confdl.No.67/2016, the petitioner has filed this Habeas Corpus Petition. 2. The grounds of detention read that the detenu came to adverse notice in the following cases: (i) Crime No.66 of 2010 registered on the file of Thiruvengadam Police Station, for the commission of the offences under Sections 147, 148, 29...
S. Anand Vs. The Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to declare that the petitioner's land comprised in Survey Nos. 509, 510, 511/1, 514, 515, 520, 521 and 522 at No.28, Uppilipalayam Village, Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore, is deemed to be released from the reservation of Section 38 of Town and Country Planning Act and consequently direct the respondent to pass an appropriate orders for release of petitioner's land comprised in Survey Nos. 509, 510, 511/1, 514, 515, 520, 521 and 522 at No.28, Uppilipalayam Village, Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore.) 1. The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to declare that the petitioner's land comprised in Survey Nos. 509, 510, 511/1, 514, 515, 520, 521 and 522 at No.28, Uppilipalayam Village, Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore, is deemed to be released from the reservation of Section 38 of Town and Country Planning Act and consequently...
Gunasekaran Vs. State by The Inspector of Police, Perambalur District
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C against the Judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur in S.C.No.66 of 2006 dated 20.09.2007.) A-1 in the Sessions case in S.C.No.66 of 2006 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mahalir Needhimandram, Perambalur is the appellant. 2. A-1's mother is A-2. They were tried for charges under Section 498-A and 304-B IPC. 3. After trial, the Trial Court acquitted both from the charge under Section 304-B IPC. The Trial Court also acquitted A-2 from the charge under Section 498-A IPC. However, convicted A-1 under Section 498-A IPC. and sentenced him to 3 years R.I. and fined him Rs.2000/- in default to undergo 5 months R.I. A-1 has paid the fine amount. 4. The case of the prosecution briefly runs as under: (1) On 6.12.1998, A-1 married Vetriselvi, the elder daughter of PWs-1 and 2. Her brother and sister are PWs-3 and 4. At the time of marriage, several dowry items were given to A-1. It was acknowl...