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.
Rathinammal Vs. Manickam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal, filed under Section 378 of Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the order of dismissal, dated 22.08.2016, passed in S.T.C.No.14 of 2007, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Mettur, Salem.) 1. The Appellant/Complainant has preferred the instant Criminal Appeal as against the judgment, dated 22.08.2016, passed in S.T.C.No.14 of 2007, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Mettur, Salem/trial Court. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The Complaint in S.T.C.No.14 of 2007, on the file of the trial Court, came to be dismissed on 22.08.2016, for the reason that, in spite of service of final notice, the Complainant was absent, and there was no representation on her behalf. 4. According to the Learned Counsel for the Appellant/Complainant, since the main case was posted for arguments, an opportunity might have been provided to the Appellant/Complainant to substantiate her version of the case. 5. Repelling the submission of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant/Co...
Loganathan Vs. The Secretary to Government, Department of Home Affairs ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, by calling the records relating to the order passed by the 1st respondent by his G.O.(2D) 390 dated 01.08.2013 by confirming the order passed by the 2nd respondent in his Proceedings No.RC.No.1380/AP/II(3)/2005 dated 28.01.2005 and the 3rd respondent in P.R.No.63/2003 dated 07.02.2004 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to pay the petitioner all the consequential attendant, service and monitory benefit.) 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction, in the nature of Writ, by calling the records relating to the order passed by the 1st respondent by his G.O.(2D) 390 dated 01.08.2013 by confirming the order passed by the 2nd respondent in his Proceedings No.RC No.1380/AP/II(3)/2005 dated 28.01.2005 and the 3rd respondent in P...
M/s. Escorts Ltd., Rep. By its Assistant Manager Finance, Arumbakkam V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to refund the excess entry tax paid by the petitioner for the assessment years 1996-97.) Common Order: 1. Heard Mr. R.L. Ramani, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.B.Raveendran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing for the respondent. With the consent of either side, the writ petitions are taken up for disposal. 2. The prayer sought for by the petitioner in all these writ petitions is for a direction upon the respondent to revise the excess entry tax paid by the petitioner for the relevant assessment years. 3. The petitioner is a Public Limited Company engaged in the manufacture of the tractors having its factory in the State of Haryana and depots and branches in several places including Chennai. The petitioner is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent un...
Associated Brothers' Club, Rep by its General Secretary, M. Askar Ali, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from interfering with the members of the petitioner's club and their guests playing RUMMY (13 cards) with or without stakes at the petitioner's members club premises at No.141-B, Purusawalkam High Road, Kellys, Chennai-600 010.) 1. The writ petition has been filed seeking a Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering with the members of the petitioner's club and their guests playing RUMMY (13 cards) with or without stakes at the petitioner's members club premises at No.141-B, Purusawalkam High Road, Kellys, Chennai-600 010. 2. The only ground which has been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the police authorities under the guise of investigation/enquiry, without any basis, suddenly came raid and make the members to put great hardship. According to the petitioner, they have been running this Club for the past 61 years ...
G. Kannan Vs. Natarajan and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.20 of 2010 dated 21.12.2010 on the file of Principal Sub-court, Tindivanam confirming the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.472 of 2005 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam, dated 20.02.2010.) 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2010 made in A.S.No.20 of 2010 on the file of the Sub Court, Tindivanam, confirming the judgment and decree dated 20.02.2010 made in O.S.No.472 of 2005 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tindivanam. 2. The suit has been laid by the plaintiff for declaration and permanent injunction. 3. The suit property has been described to be situated in Thenpasiyar Village, survey No.109/4B Hec.0.51.0 with specific measurements. 4. Now according to the plaintiff, the suit property is the ancestral property of his father Govindharaju Pillai and further...
David Appa Durai Vs. Tirunelveli C.M.S. Evangelical Church Sangam and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer:Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the Judgement and Decree dated 26.08.2010 and made in A.S.No.73 of 2010 on the file of the Sub-Court, Tirunelveli, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 07.04.2010 in O.S.No.740 of 2008 on the file of the First Additional District Munsif, Tirunelveli.) 1. The plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No.740 of 2008 on the file of the First Additional District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli, is the appellant in the above second appeal. 2. The first respondent herein is the Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, (Central Act). Subsequently, the first respondent is also stated to have registered the Society under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. The second defendant who is an individual was the Secretary of the 27 Schools run by the first defendant. The other defendants are the officials of the educational department of the State. The suit is for permanent injunction restraining the de...
M/s. Kumbhat Holographics, Rep. by its Authorised Signatory/Partner an ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the common order of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 10.3.2016 made in W.P.Nos.1211, 2009, 922 and 1759 of 2016.) Common Judgment: Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J. 1. These writ appeals are directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge dated 10.03.2016, whereby, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petitions on the ground that the Tender Calling Authority has right to impose conditions in consonance with the Tender Transparency Act, 1998. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ appeals have been preferred. 2. The brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of the appeals, as could be culled out from the affidavit filed by the appellants/petitioners, are as hereunder :- The appellants are either registered partnership firm or proprietary concern or company, doing business in the manufacture of holograms. The second respondent issued tender notification on 11.12.2015, for the supply...
Dr. K.S. Gamal Abdul Nasser Vs. The Principal Secretary to Government, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(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 passed in Letter No.2137/A1/2012-8, dated 11.09.2015 and quash the same and re-fix the petitioner's pay notionally at Rs.16,700/- with effect from 13.12.2006 in the scale of pay of Rs.14,300-400-18,300 and under revised scale of pay of Rs.37,400-67,000 with Grade Pay Rs.8,700/- for fixation of his pay notionally at Rs.40,390/- with Grade Pay Rs.8,700/- with effect from 13.12.2006 in the light of G.O.Ms.No.234, Finance (PC) Department, dated 01.06.2009 and G.O.Ms.No.245, Health and Family Welfare (A2) Department, dated 30.10.2013 and further regulated at Rs.42,380/- with effect from 01.01.2007, Rs.43,920/- with effect from 01.10.2008 and Rs.45,500/- with effect from 01.10.2009 with Grade Pay Rs.8,700/- with monetary benefit from 23.10.2009 to the petitioner for which he rendered service as Principal, Tamil N...
U. Saravanan and Others Vs. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by its Home Se ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking direction to the first respondent to withdraw the case in Crime No.143 of 2016, under Sections 406, 420, read with Section 34 I.P.C., on the file of the fifth respondent, dated 4.6.2016 and to entrust the same to the fourth respondent, for an investigation of the case by a competent officer and to file a final report before the jurisdictional Magistrate within the time stipulated by this Court.) M. Jaichandren, J. 1. Heard Mr.R.C.Paul Kanakaraj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, as well as Mr.V.M.R.Rajentren, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 and 5 and Mr.K.Srinivasan, learned Special Public Prosecutor (C.B.I.), appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent. 2. The above Criminal Original Petitions have been filed, claiming that this Court may be pleased to direct the first respondent to withdraw the case, in Crime No.143...
S.K. Balasubramanian (Died) and Others Vs.
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 06.07.2012 made in A.S.No.97 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur confirming the judgment and decree dated 11.08.2000 made in O.S.No.126 of 1999 on the file of Sub Court, Sivakasi.) 1. This Second Appeal is filed by plaintiffs 2 and 3 in the suit in O.S.No.126 of 1999 on the file of the Sub Court, Sivakasi. Originally, the suit was filed by one Krishna Konar. Pending suit, he died and his legal representatives, namely, the appellants 1 and 2 herein were impleaded as plaintiffs 2 and 3. Pending this appeal, the first appellant died and the appellants 3 to 6, the legal heirs of the first appellant were impleaded. 2. The plaintiffs filed the suit for partition of their share in the suit properties and for consequential injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the suit properties. The suit properties are punja land...
- ‹ Prev
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 50
- 51
- Next ›
- Last »