Chennai Court February 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.
V. Ponnusamy Vs. State Represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of the learned Special Judge cum Principal Sessions Judge, Coimbatore made in Special S.C.No.36 of 2007 by his judgment dated 3.4.2008 convicting and sentencing the appellant to undergo 6 months Rigorous Imprisonment for the offences under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo 1 month R.I., and under Section 506 (ii) IPC sentencing him to undergo 6 months Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo 1 month R.I. and directed both the sentences to run concurrently.) The sole accused in the Special Sessions Case in Special S.C. No.36 of 2007 on the file of the learned Special Judge under Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989/Principal Sessions Judge, Coimbatore challenges his conviction...
B. Raja Vs. State by Inspector of Police, Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
(Prayer:Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking to call for the entire records connected with the Judgement in S.C.No.189 of 2010 dated 26.02.2015 passed by the learned Mahila Sessions Judge, Chennai and set aside the same.) The sole accused on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Mahila Court), Chennai in S.C.No.189 of 2010 challenges his conviction and sentence. 2. The said Judge while acquitting him from a charge under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act convicted and sentenced him as under: ad>ConvictionSentence(i) 498(A) I.P.C.3 years R.I.(ii)306 I.P.C.7 years R.I. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 3. The prosecution case runs as under: (i) The accused/ appellant and the deceased Shenbagavalli were lovers. They have become life partners. They have set up their separate family. They have children. (ii) On 06.03.2009, at about 8 p.m., Shenbagavalli was brought to the Government Royapettah Hospi...
K. Naresh and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Principal Sec ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the provisional list published by the third respondent on 15.11.2015, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to implement Tamil Medium reservation in proper perspective as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Appointment on preferential basis in the services under the State of Persons Studied in Tamil Medium Act, 2010 while filling up the post of Sub-Inspector as per the recruitment Notification No. 1/205 issued by the 3rd respondent on 08.02.2015.) Pushpa Sathyanarayana, J. 1. The petitioners, claiming to be applicants pursuant to Notification dated 08.02.2015 issued by the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police (Taluk), have invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the provisional list published by the Board and seek a direction to the respondents to...
K. Meena Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Department of Housing and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
(Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pursuant to G.O(1D)No.87 Housing and Urban Development (HB5(1) Department dated 08.01.2008 and quash the same.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent in G.O(1D)No.87, Housing and Urban Development [HB-5(1)] Department, dated 08.01.2008 and quash the same. 2. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner is a social server and in recognition of her service Plot No.C2/A in Theni Housing Board Area has been allotted to her and subsequently the first respondent has cancelled the same by way of passing the impugned Government Order on 08.01.2008, wherein it is stated that the price of the plot has not been fixed. Under the said circumstances, the present writ petition has been fil...
M/s. Ashok Leyland Limited Vs. M/s. Renault Nissan Automative India Pv ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitutition of India praying to pass orders setting aside the order dated 04.02.2016, passed in O.S.Sr.No.766 of 2016, on the file of the Hon'ble District Judge II, Kancheepuram and direct taking up of the plaint in O.S.Sr.No.766 of 2016 on record.) 1. Flagrant violation of law as well as errors of law apparent on face of record would justify High Court interfering with orders in exercise of revisional powers - Ruled the Supreme Court in a case of The Managing Director, Nadipissai Pulavar K.R.Ramaswamy Sugar Mills, Mayiladuthurai Vs. A.Fareed Nawa and another, reported in [MANU/TN/0123/1996]. 2. Challenging the impugned order dated 04.02.2016, passed by the District Court, Kancheepuram, holding that the suit is not maintainable before the said Court and returning the plaint for presentation before proper forum as amounting to flagrant violation of law, this revision petition has been filed by the plaintiff. 3. The petit...
N. Palanisamy and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep by its Secret ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
(Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 3rd respondent in Resolution No.248 and 249 /2013 dated 23.12.2013 respectively in sofar as demolition and reconstruction is concerned and the consequential proceedings of the 2nd respondent in NA.KA.No.29/2014/A2 dated 30.01.2014 and NA.KA.No.29/2014/A2 dated 04.03.2014, quash the same and direct the 2nd respondent to extend the lease for shop Nos.1 to 11 in vacant land line shops for further period of three years from 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2017 as per the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.92 dated 3.7.2007 and Letter Lr.No.8655/Na.Ne4(2)/09-1 dated 12.03.2009 or in the alternative direct the respondents to re-allot the shops to the petitioners after reconstruction as per PWD rates. W.P.No.8866 of 2014: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for ...
The Secretary to Government Department of School Education and Others ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
(Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 04.06.2015 in W.P.(MD).No.8895 of 2015, and allow the writ appeal.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. On the submissions of Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government Pleader, that there is a suppression in filing the subsequent writ petition W.P.(MD).No.8895/2015, We directed the Registry to put up the entire bundle in W.P.(MD).No. 18129/2013. 2. We have perused the order passed thereon. Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus sought for to quash the order of the District Educational Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District, in Na.Ka.No.1672/A1/2001, dated 13.06.2013, and consequential prayer for a direction to the respondents therein to provide employment assistance on compassionate ground, has been considered in detail and vide order, dated 11.11.2013, prayer sought for in W.P.(MD).No.18129 of 2013, has been negatived and writ petition has been dismissed. 3. At paragraph number 1 of the affidavit filed in the present W.P....
The Management, Balu Transport Vs. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
(Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent relating to the award in I.D.No.79/1994 dated 11.12.2007 and quash the same.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ so as to call for records relating to the order passed in I.D.No.79 of 1994 dated 11.12.2007 by the first respondent and quash the same. 2. It is averred in the petition that the second respondent by name Sundaram has served as a driver in the transport company of the petitioner and from 17.09.1993 he failed to report his duty and subsequently various notices have been issued and finally an Advocate has been appointed as Enquiry Officer and he has given so many enquiry notices thereby calling upon the second respondent to make his appearance for enquiry. But the second respondent has not turned ...
M/s. Sri Adinath Traders Vs. The Union of India, rep. by Secretary, De ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records in and connected with the Public Notice No.PS-7/2015 issued from File No. F.No.XVI/13/13/N/PS/CC/2015 dated 14.09.2015 of the 4th respondent and all acts pursuant to the same, quash the same as it is contrary to the public policy and constitutional guarantees of equality and free trade norms and in pursuance of the Order of this Court in M.P.No.2 of 2015 in W.P.No.27008 of 2015 dated 28.08.2015.) 1. Though two vacate stay applications have been filed in W.M.P.Nos.75 and 76 of 2016, by consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and the learned counsels have been heard at length. 2. The petitioner is a registered dealer under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act. He was also issued IEC number by the Office of the Director General of Foreign Trade. He deals with spices, dry fruits, chemicals and other similar items. The poppy seeds are no...
P. Shanmugasundaram Vs. The District Collector, Erode Collectorate, Er ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-05-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 7 to take action against the eighth respondent, viz., the Thiru Neelakandar Mandapam, East Agrahara Street, Kodumudi Village, Erode Taluk, Erode District, in view of the petitioner's representation, dated 09.01.2016, by appreciating the facts and circumstances.) M. Venugopal, J. 1. This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 7 to take action against the eighth respondent, viz., the Thiru Neelakandar Mandapam, East Agrahara Street, Kodumudi Village, Erode Taluk, Erode District, in view of the petitioner's representation, dated 09.01.2016 by appreciating the facts and circumstances. 2. Heard both sides. 3. According to the petitioner, about 103 individuals had purchased the property measuring an extent of 5458-3/4 Sq.Ft. at East Agraharam Street, Kodumudi Village, Erode Taluk and Dist...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »