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.
P. Mahimainathan Vs. State of Tamilnadu Rep. by its Secretary, The Sec ...
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 records of the second respondent and quash the impugned Endorsement letter, dated 01.08.2016, vide Rc.No.ESTT.II(2).8896/2015 passed by the second respondent as null and void and consequently direct the second respondent to include the name of the petitioner at the appropriate place below the name of his immediate senior Mr.Sivaganesan found in Sl.No.30 and above his immediate junior Mr.R.Munusamy found in Sl.No.31 in the approved list of candidates dated 15.04.2013, vide Rc.No.A1/6212/2013 of the second respondent found fit for promotion to the post of Inspector of Police (General) for the year 2013-14 with all attendant benefits.) 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records of the second respondent and quash the impugned Endorsement letter, dated 01.08.2016, vi...
Haja Mohideen Abdul Jaleel and Others Vs. Union of India, Represented ...
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 Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the first respondent in Order No.26/2016- CUS in F.No.373/32/B/13-RA-CUS dated 03.03.2016 and quash the same and consequently allow the petitioner to redeem the goods under Section 125 as well as re-export on payment of redemption fine in respect of the gold subject matter in O.S.No.28 of 2011 on the file of the 3rd respondent within a reasonable time frame. Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the first respondent in Order No.06/2016- CUS in F.No.380/60/B/13-RA dated 01.02.2016 and quash the same and consequently allow the petitioner to redeem the goods under Section 125 as well as re-export on payment of redemption fine in respect of the gold subject...
Murugan and Other Vs. Sivasankar and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 08.12.2010 passed in A.S.No.37 of 2010 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Cuddalore confirming the judgment and decree dated 04.03.2010 passed in O.S.No.466 of 2008 before the Additional District Munsif Court, Cuddalore.) 1. The defendants 2 to 4 in this second appeal have challenged the judgment and decree dated 08.12.2010 passed in A.S.No.37 of 2010 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Cuddalore, confirming the judgment and decree dated 04.03.2010 passed in O.S.No.466 of 2008 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Cuddalore. 2. The suit has been initially laid by the plaintiffs for declaration and permanent injunction. Subsequently, on account of the trespass made into the suit property by the defendants, during the pendency of the suit, by way of amendment, the plaintiffs have also sought the relief of recovery of possession of the suit property from...
Stella Sunitha Vs. The Sub Registrar, Pallavaram and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 15.6.2016 passed in W.P.No.17194 of 2016 on the file of this court.) Huluvadi G.Ramesh, J. 1. Heard the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the parties. 2. This appeal is filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 15.6.2016, in W.P.No.17194 of 2016, which was filed seeking a direction to the respondents to return Rectification Deed dated 3.6.2015 registered as Document No.P162/2015 to the appellant/petitioner. 3. In paragraph 6 of the order, the learned Single Judge has observed as under:- "Though the petitioner prays fro the larger relief, this court in the light of the facts and circumstances, directs the first respondent to act on the endorsement of the second respondent in mjpK/vz;-5475-M1-2016 dated 7.4.2016 in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decisio...
R. Tamil Selvan and Others Vs. The Union of India, Rep. by The Union o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st Respondent relating to the orders in No.1563/1/2013 dated 09/07/2013 to quash the same and to issue consequential directions to the Respondents to fix the pay of the Petitioners with effect from 01.01.1996 in the upgraded scale of pay of Rs.5000-150-8000 Administrative Reforms as per G.O.Ms.No.58 Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 21.12.1997 and grant consequential service and monetary benefits.) P. Parthiban, J. 1. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st Respondent relating to the orders in No.1563/1/2013 dated 09/07/2013 to quash the same and to issue consequential directions to the Respondents to fix the pay of the Petitioners with effect from 01.01.1996 in the upgraded scale of pay of Rs.50...
A. Thamimul Ansari Vs. The District Collector, Nagapattinam District a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents 1 to 5 to take suitable action on the Complaints of the Petitioner dated 27.01.2009 and 16.12.2009 against the Respondents 6 to 20 so as to enable the Petitioner and his family members to have all kinds of social relationship and social rights at their native Village, namely, Kiliyanur Village, Tarangambadi Taluk, Nagapattinam District.) 1. The petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to take suitable action on his complaints dated 27.01.2009 and 16.12.2009 made against the respondents 6 to 20 so as to enable him and his family members to have a social relationship with the respondents of their native Village namely Kiliyanur Village, Tarangambadi Taluk, Nagapattinam District. 2. Heard Mr.K.Selvaraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.R.Govindasamy, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the resp...
Anjali Devi Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Inspector o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 29.01.2016 made in Crl.M.P. No.369 of 2015 in S.C. No.26 of 2015 on the file of the Mahila Court, Perambalur and set aside the same as illegal and arbitrary against settled principles of law and duty of court and issue further direction for collection of blood samples of petitioner, 1st accused and their girl child by name Tamil Kanni, in the presence of each other before the Court of law and send a fresh DNA test and report.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking the following relief: to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 29.01.2016 made in Crl.M.P. No.369 of 2015 in S.C. No.26 of 2015 on the file of the Mahila Court, Perambalur and set aside the same as illegal and arbitrary against settled principles of law and duty of court and issue further direction for collection of blood samples of ...
Thirumalai Nambirajan (died) and Others Vs. Saravanan and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to expedite the proceedings in O.S.No.57 of 2011, on the file of the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Nanguneri.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to expedite the proceedings in O.S.No.57 of 2011, on the file of the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Nanguneri. 2. The respondent herein filed the suit in O.S.No.57 of 2011 in the year 2011 seeking permanent injunction against the Petitioners/defendants. In the said suit, issues were framed and thereafter, the suit was posted for examination of P.W.1 and on 6.9.2016 P.W.1 was examined in Chief. Thereafter, the case was posted for cross-examination of P.W.1. P.W.1 was not present on the said hearing date and the hence, the matter has been pending before the trial Court, without any progress. Hence the Petitioner has come forward with the present C.R.P for the relief s...
M/s. Sipali Drugs, Rep. by its Proprietor Mr. Rajiah Vs. Bank of India ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of certiorari, calling for the records relating to the order passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.6033 and 6034 of 2016 dated 13.05.2016 on the file of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Allikulam at Chennai, quash the same.) Common Order: S. Manikumar, J. 1. As facts and submissions made in both writ petitions are similar, by common order they are disposed of. 2. M/s.Sipali Drugs, represented by its Proprietor, Mr.Rajiah, Chennai has availed cash credit loan of Rs.2,43,38,000/-. Company is involved in manufacturing medicine and also a supplier of antibiotic capsules. There was misunderstanding in the company and hence, the partnership was dissolved. During 2013-14 company obtained Government Orders for supply of medicine. The petitioner approached the bank for financial assistance. A sum of Rs.2,25,00,000/- was sanctioned as cash credit facility. Son of the Proprietor, stood as a guarantor, by furnishing se...
D. Jayakumar Vs. The Director General of Police, Tamilnadu, Chennai an ...
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 calling for the records relating to the orders in (1) RC.No.252/8717/PRN (2)/2016 (Z.O.No.372/2016) dated 22.06.2016 of the second respondent (2) C.No.89/SC 1/2011 dated 27.03.2014 of the first respondent and (3) Rc.No.39/2327/PR.N(2)/2011 (N.Z.O.No.82/2011) dated 07.02.2011 of the second respondent and to quash the same and to issue consequential direction to the respondents to revoke the order of suspension and reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the orders in (1) RC.No.252/8717/PRN (2)/2016 (Z.O.No.372/2016) dated 22.06.2016 of the second respondent (2) C.No.89/SC 1/2011 dated 27.03.2014 of the first respondent and (3) Rc.No.39/2327/PR.N(2)/2011 (N.Z.O.No.82/2011) dated 07.02.2011 of the s...
- ‹ Prev
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 51
- Next ›
- Last »