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.
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 set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 08.01.2013, passed in M.C.O.P.No.291 of 2011, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District and Sessions Court-Special Court for E.C.Act, Thanjavur.) 1. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.291 of 2011, dated 08.01.2013, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District and Sessions Court-Special Court for E.C.Act, Thanjavur. 2. It is the case of injury caused on account of the accident took place on 05.02.2011, around 10.30 p.m. in Mannargudi- Thiruthuraipoondi Main Road. The claimant/victim filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.291 of 2011, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Additional District and Sessions Court-Special Court for E.C.Act, Thanjavur and the Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded...
Saaswathi Vs. Dhaamani
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constituion of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 24.02.2016 made in I.A.No.117 of 2015 in A.S.No.9 of 2014 on the file of the Sub court, Siilliputhur.) 1. These civil revision petition arises against the fair and decretal order dated 24.02.2016 made in I.A.No.117 of 2015 in A.S.No.9 of 2014 on the file of the Sub court, Srivilliputhur. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.17 of 2006 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Srivilliputhur. The said suit is filed for permanent injunction. The revision petitioner filed a counter claim for declaration that the suit property belongs to the petitioner. The trial Court decreed the suit and dismissed the counter claim. Aggrieved against the said judgment and decree, the petitioner preferred A.S.No.8 and 9 of 2014 and 8 of 2014 before the learned Subordinate Judge, Srivilliputhur. In A.S.No.9 of 2014...
Ravi and Another Vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Trichy Dis ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Judgment and conviction dated 04.03.2015, made in S.C.No.109 of 2014, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchy Division, Trichy.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants in Criminal Appeal (MD).No.89 of 2015 are the accused Nos.1 and 5 in S.C.No.109 of 2014 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli. There were six other accused, who were arrayed as accused No.2 to 4 and 6 to 8. The accused Nos.2 to 5 are arrayed as the respondents 2 to 5 in Crl.A.(MD).No.495 of 2016. The trial Court framed as many as six charges as detailed below: ChargeAccusedPenal Provisions1Nos.1 to 5294(b) IPC2Nos.1 to 8147 IPC3Nos.1 to 5342 IPC4Nos.1 to 8324 IPC5Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5302 IPC6Nos.3, 6 to 8302 r/w 149 IPCBy Judgment dated 04.03.2015, the trial Court convicted the accused Nos.1 to 8, as detailed below:- Accused No.Convicted under SectionsSentence imposedFine amountA1 to A5147 ...
Dierdre Elizabeth (Wright) Issar and Another Vs. Ameer Minhaj and Anot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Revision filed against the fair order and decree dated 1 June 2016, in I.A.No.26 of 2014 in O.S.No.23 of 2010 on the file of the District Judge, Nilgiris.) 1. The petitioners filed an interlocutory application before the District Court, Nilgiris in I.A.No.26 of 2014 to decide the admissibility of the unregistered sale agreements and to impound the power of attorney on account of payment of insufficient stamp duty. The application was dismissed by the Trial Court with an observation that nothing has been mentioned in the power of attorney with regard to consideration and that the sale agreements were not required to be registered. The said order is under challenge in this civil revision petition. Submissions:- 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners executed an agreement dated 12 November 1995, with the second respondent. The vendor, pursuant to the sale agreement dated 12 November 1995, executed a power of attorn...
The Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. B. Rohi ...
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 Award of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) (50% of the Award amount Rs.20,000/-) passed in M.C.O.P.No.1686 of 2009, dated 29.06.2011, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Cum Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Madurai.) 1. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the Award of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) (50% of the Award amount Rs.20,000/-) passed in M.C.O.P.No.1686 of 2009, dated 29.06.2011, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Cum Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Madurai. 2. In this appeal, the injured victim/claimant filed an application seeking compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurai and the Tribunal by considering the facts and circumstances of the case, granted compensation to the injured victim. The accident took place on 27.06.2009 around 09.30 a.m. at Wring Road, Ramanathap...
P. Ranganathan Vs. Chief Regional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. ...
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 in its impugned order No.CBRO/TRF/2014-15/26, dated 13.10.2014 and quash the same and direct the respondents to post the petitioner in the same place, i.e., with the second respondent's office at Salem.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent in its impugned order No.CBRO/TRF/2014-15/26, dated 13.10.2014 and quash the same and direct the respondents to post the petitioner in the same place, i.e., with the second respondent's office at Salem. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he belongs to SC Community. Through Employment Exchange, he was appointed as sub-staff in the Divisional Office of the respondents at Salem on 01.11.1990 and joined duty on 21.01.1990 with the second respondent. He completed his prob...
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Tiruchir ...
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 set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 31.01.2013, passed in M.C.O.P.No.1017 of 2006, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Tiruchirappalli.) 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 31.01.2013, passed in M.C.O.P.No.1017 of 2006, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Tiruchirappalli. 2. It is the case of injury caused due to the accident took place on 25.10.2004, around 5.30 a.m., in the Government Transport Corporation Depot, Thuraiyur Branch. The injured/victim filed a claim petition seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Tiruchirappalli, in MCOP.1017 of 2006. The Tribunal, by considering the facts and circumstances of the case, granted a sum of Rs.2,22,000/- as total com...
J. Nandagopal Vs. Union of India, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Min ...
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 Mandamus to direct the third respondent to disburse the entire retirement benefits to the petitioner who got retired on superannuation on 31.05.2015 with appropriate interest.) 1. The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the third respondent to disburse the entire retirement benefits to the petitioner who retired on superannuation on 31.05.2015 with appropriate interest. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, it is averred by the petitioner that he was a permanent employee of Chennai Port Trust Industrial Employees' Co-operative Canteen (for short, 'the Canteen). He joined the service of the Canteen as an Attender on 30.04.1979. On 24.09.1988, he was promoted as Junior Supervisor and continued as such till his retirement on 31.05.2015. He had an unblemished record of service for the last more than ...
L. Karunakaran Vs. Selvam and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 407(1) and 482 Crl.P.C., praying to set aside the order dated 06.06.2008 made in Tr.O.P.No.528 of 2008 on the file of the First Additional District Court, Erode and transfer the case in S.C.No.3 of 2008 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Bhavani, to any other court having jurisdiction to try the case at Perundurai, Gobichettipalayam or Sathyamangalam at Erode District.) 1. The petitioner, has filed this Crl.O.P., praying to quash the order dated 06.06.2008 made in Tr.O.P.No.528 of 2008, on the file of the First Additional District Court, Erode. 2. The petitioner states that he is L.W.4 in S.C.No.3 of 2008 pending on the file of Assistant Sessions Court, Bhavani, and he has come forward with this Crl.O.P., seeking to set aside the order passed by the First Additional District Court, Erode, in Tr.O.P.No.528 of 2008, whereby, the plea of the petitioner herein seeking transfer of S.C.No.3 of 2008 from the file of Assistant Sessions Court, Bha...
K. Kumar Vs. The Commissioner, Tambaram Municipality, Kancheepuram Dis ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-02-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 07.11.2016 passed by the learned District Munsif in I.A.Nos.1095, 1099 and 1094 of 2016 respectively in O.S.No.139 of 2009.) Common Order: 1. The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.139 of 2009 filed three interlocutory applications before the learned District Munsif, Tambaram, in I.A.Nos.1095, 1099 and 1094 of 2016 to recall P.W.1, to condone the delay in filing the documents and to re-open the case respectively. The Facts 2. The petitioner wanted to reopen the case for marking a document, which is in the nature of an extract of Town Survey stated to have been issued by the Commissioner of Tambaram Municipality to Mrs.Kaliammal. 3. The learned District Munsif, Tambaram, dismissed all the three applications, by common order dated 7 November 2016. Feeling aggrieved, the unsuccessful petitioner in the interlocutory applications is before this Court. Su...
- ‹ Prev
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- Next ›
- Last »