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.
S. Sevugan Chettiar Vs. Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Ch ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
1. J. Narayanaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel accepts notice for the respondents. Heard both. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner is a retired employee of the ICICI Bank and is presently aged 68 years. He is constrained to approach this Court in terms of the proceedings dated 4.8.2016 issued by the third respondent. 3. The issue lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner, upon retirement, filed his return of income for the relevant year and the assessment was finalized. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of S. Palaniappan v. I.T.O. [Civil Appeal No. 4411 of 2010 dated 28.9.2015] held that a person, who has opted for voluntary retirement under the Early Retirement Option Scheme shall be entitled to exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Following the said decision, the Central Board of Direct Taxes issued a circular dated 1...
S.A. Zahir Hussain and Another Vs. T. Somasundaram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 C.P.C. against the judgment and decree, dated 12.09.2014 and made in A.S.No.28 of 2014 on the file of the learned IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai confirming the judgment and decree dated 04.06.2013 and made in O.S.No.629 of 2008 on the file of VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) 1. This memorandum of Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 12.09.2014 and made in the appeal in A.S.No.28 of 2014 on the file of the IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, confirming the judgment and decree dated 04.06.2013 and made in the suit in O.S.No.629 of 2008 on the file of the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The appellants herein are the defendants in the suit in O.S.No.629 of 2008 whereas the respondent is the plaintiff. 3. For easy reference and also for the sake of convenience, the appellants may herein after be referred to as the defendants and the respondents be referre...
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Kumbak ...
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, passed in M.C.O.P.No.1020 of 2012, dated 17.02.2014, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / III- Additional Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli.) 1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the set aside the judgment and decree, passed in M.C.O.P.No.1020 of 2012, dated 17.02.2014, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / III- Additional Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli. 2. It is a case of an injury caused due to the accident took place on 31.01.2012, around 2.00 a.m. near Keelavatiyam Bus Stand at Tirupur-Trichy Road. The injured filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.1020 of 2012 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / III- Additional Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli and the Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances, awarded a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as total compensation. Aggrieved by the award, the ...
Mohammed Meeran Vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Ariyamangal ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. challenging judgement of conviction and sentences imposed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli, in S.C.No.147 of 2015 dated 29.04.2016.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The sole accused in S.C.No.147 of 2015 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli. He stood charged for offence under Section 302 of IPC. The trial court, by judgement dated 29.04.2016, convicted the accused under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three years. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the accused is before this court with this criminal appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:- The deceased in this case was one Mrs.Apsara Banu. P.Ws.1 to 3 are the father, mother and brother respectively of the deceased. The deceased was given in marriage to the accused three years...
Sundarapandiyan Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary, Che ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Kaditha. No.4168 / Pani/ 9(1) 2008-2 dated 13.05.2008 passed by the 1st Respondent and to quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the Respondents to give employment to the petitioner under compassionate appointment in the place of the petitioner s father late Chinnathambi S/o. Pandi Perumal Pillai who died on 23.02.1983 in the course of employment.) 1. This Writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash the order passed by the 1st respondent declining to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner and for a consequential direction to provide him an appointment on compassionate grounds. 2. The Petitioner submits that his father namely Chinnathambi joined as headman in Vellampatti Panchayat at Madurai District and thereafter he cleared the Tamil Nadu Public Service C...
K. Manikandan Vs. The Chief Educational Officer, O/o. The Chief Educat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: In W.P.No. 9860 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impunged order passed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings in x/K/vz;/10882-M3-2015 dated 05.02.2016 and to quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the 2nd respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Physical Education Teacher (P.E.T) with effect from 03.08.2015 within a period that may be stipulated by this Court. In W.P.No.33954 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1899/A2/2016, dated 15.09.2016 and to quash the same as illegal and consequentially, to direct the 1st respondent and 2nd respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as...
P. Iyyanar Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary to Govern ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the 1st to 5th respondents herein to change the investigation of the death case of petitioner's son Muthukumar in Crime No.498 of 2016 on the file of the 9th respondent by other agency especially by Crime Branch CID.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the Respondents 1 to 5 herein to change the investigation of the death case of petitioner's son Muthukumar in Crime No.498 of 2016 on the file of the 9th respondent to any other agency, especially by Crime Branch CID. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. Muthukumar aged about 26 years, a Diploma holder, is the son of Iyyanar, the petitioner herein. Iyyanar and his family are residents of Salem District. Muthukumar and his friends had take a house on rent near Sriperumbudur and he was working in M/s Sona Koyo Steering System Ltd. 4. On 22.06.2016, the police recei...
Gurubatham Vs. State Rep. By the Inspector of Police, CBI, ACB, Chenna ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in Crl.MP.No.816 of 2016 in Spl.C.C.No.1 of 2010 on the file of the Special Judge, Puducherry and to set aside the same.) 1. The Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in Cr.MP.No.816 of 2016 in Spl.C.C.No.1 of 2010 on the file of the Special Judge, Puducherry and to set aside the same. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.04.2008, the petitioner/accused was caught red handed while demanding and accepting an amount of R.5,000/- as illegal gratification from one Sri.R.Panneer Selvam of Villianur for registering a release deed and a case was registered by CBI, ACB, Chennai, u/s. 7 of PC Act, 1988 in R.C.No.MAI 2008 A 0018 on the same day, on the basis of the complaint of R.Panneer Selvam. Subsequently, a search was conducted in the residence of the petitioner/ac...
V. Ekambaram Vs. V. Anand Ram and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure against the jdugment and Decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Vellore dated 24.03.2008 in A.S.No.42 of 2006 reversing the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Munsif, Vellore dated 02.03.2005 in O.S.No.1394 of 1993.) 1. The defendant in the suit is the appellant herein. The suit filed for declaration of the absoulte right and title over the suit property and consequential injunction. Further, to declare the alleged right, title and interest of the defendant in the suit property, even if there were to be any, got extinguished in law and permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering the peaceful possession. The trial court dismissed the suit. On appeal, the trial court judgment was setaside. Suit was allowed. Aggrieved by the reversal judgment, the present appeal is filed. 2. Background of the case: The suit property was purchased by one Venkatareddy. He died about 16 year...
K. Ramadoss Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu rep by the Secretary to G ...
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 Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the respondent relating to order in (1) Letter No.36317/Pol.1A/2004-3, Home (Pol.1A) Department, dated 30.04.2004 and (2) Lr.No.70551/Pol.1A/2004-1, Home (Pol.1A) Department dated 04.08.2004, quash the same and issue consequential directions to the respondent to include the same of the petitioner in the panel of Additional Superintendent of Police, fit for promotion as Superintendent of Police for the year 1991-1992, approved in G.O.Ms.No.588, Home (Services B) Department, dated 03.04.1992, below Thiru.R.Shshadri (Sl.No.6) and above Thiru.R.Balasubramanian (Sl.No.7) and consequently grant him notional promotion to the petitioner as Superintendent of Police with retrospective effect from the date of Promotion of his Junior, Thiru.R.Balasubramanian, with consequential benefits, including higher pensionary benefits.) 1. The prayer in t...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »