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.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Coimbatore Vs. K. Muthusingam and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
R. Sudhakar, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 4. 2. The appellant/insurer of the van has filed the appeal challenging the award dated 30.07.2012, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Addl. District Judge), Tirupur, made in MCOP No. 189 of 2007. 3. The facts, in brief, is as under :- On 05.12.2006 at about 05.30 hours, the first respondent/claimant was travelling in the van, bearing Regn. No. TN-31-D-0939, belonging to the second respondent herein, as additional driver. At that time, the van, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the stationary lorry bearing Regn. No. TN-28-A-5560, which was standing on the left side of the road and due to the said accident, the claimant suffered grievous injuries. The claimant was admitted to the Rex Hospital, Coimbatore and received treatment between 5.12.2006 and 3.1.07. With regard to the said occurrence, a case was register...
The Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order, dated 29.09.2015, made in W.P.(MD)No.17561 of 2015.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is to an order, made in W.P.(MD)No.17561 of 2015, dated 29.09.2015, by which, a learned single Judge has directed the Secretary to the Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9, 1st appellant, to pass final orders, on the charge memo, in Na.Ka.No.29948/2004/F 1-2, dated 30.06.2004. 2. Material on record discloses that when the respondent was working in Dindigul Municipality, he was issued with a Charge memo, dated 30.08.2004, for certain irregularities, alleging that he has caused loss to the Dindigul Municipality. Reading of G.O.(D)No.150, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 27.04.2006, indicates that the respondent has been transferred from Dindigul Municipality and posted at Karur Municipality. By the above said Government Order, the ...
B. Namachivayabarathi Vs. S. Murugan and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
(Prayer: This contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of the Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondents for the wilful disobedience of the orders of this Honourable Court made in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8687 of 2015 dated 05.08.2015.) 1. This contempt petition has been filed for punishing the respondents for the wilful disobedience of the orders of this Court made in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8687 of 2015 dated 05.08.2015. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, petitioner enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed on 15.10.2015. A copy of the closure report has been furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar. 3. In view of the above submission, this Contempt Petition is dismissed. No costs....
M. Manickam Vs. The Director of Town Panchayat, Chennai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS directing the respondents to return back the amount to the tune of Rs.1,10,000/- (one Lakh ten thousand rupees only) deposit amount paid by the petitioner for shop Nos.32,59,15,3,13,10,1,14 Batlagundu Town Panchayat Bus Stand and daily market within the time stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. When the matter is taken-up for hearing, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the third respondent / Batlagundu Town Panchayat Bus Stand submitted that he would suitably advise the third respondent not only in returning the Earnest Money Deposit, which is sought for in this Writ Petition, but also those participants who were unsuccessful in getting the tender of the third respondent. 2. Recording the said submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs....
R. Sekar Vs. D. Subramanian
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-26-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order dated 11.01.2016 made in I.A.No.603 of 2014 in O.S.No.445 of 2014 on the file of the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Trichy.) 1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 11.01.2016, made in I.A.No.603 of 2014 in O.S.No.445 of 2014, on the file of the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Trichy. 2. The revision petitioner is the second defendant. The first respondent is the plaintiff. The first respondent / plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.445 of 2014, on the file of the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Trichy, against the revision petitioner and the second respondent, for injunction. 3. The revision petitioner filed I.A.No.603 of 2014, to reject the plaint, on the ground that the first respondent suppressed the material facts relating to case in O.S.No.310 of 2013, for permanent injunction filed by pet...
N. Vellaichamy Vs. The District Collector, Madurai District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 03.03.2008 on the file of the third respondent and quash the same as illegal with the consequential benefits.) 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 order or direction in the nature of writ calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 03.03.2008 passed by the third respondent and quash the same. 2. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner has served as sweeper under the direct control of the third respondent. During his service, the third respondent has passed the impugned order dated 03.03.2008 and thereby terminated the petitioner from service. In the impugned order dated 03.03.2008, no specific allegations have been mentioned. Under the said circumstances, the present petitio...
A. Dharaniselvam Vs. The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
Dr. P. Devadass, J. 1. The sole accused in the Sessions case in S.C.No.271 of 2009 on the file of the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Salem is the appellant. 2 In the said Court, after trial, on 20.9.2012 he was convicted and sentenced as under: ad>ConvictionSentence 364 I.P.C. 10 years R.I. and fine Rs.5,000/- i/d 2 years R.I. 302 I.P.C. Life imprisonment and fine Rs.10,000/- i/d 2 years R.I. 201 I.P.C. 2 years R.I. and fine Rs.2,000/- i/d 6 months R.I. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 3. The case of the prosecution briefly runs as under: (1) In Salem District, in Sankari, there is Brightsun Matriculation School. PW-5/Correspondent and his wife PW-16 are managing the School. In this School, the accused served as P.T. Master. He is married. His wife is also employed in the said School. PW-14, a lady teacher, is also employed in the same School. She is a widow. She is residing in Sankari. (2) Illegal intimacy developed between the accused and PW-14. She beca...
Kanaka Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Distr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to call for the records relating to the order dated 10.02.2016 made in Crl.M.P.No.144 of 2016 in S.C.No.6 of 2008 on the file of the Mahila Court, Tiruvannamalai and set aside the same and permit the petitioner to cross examine the witnesses P.Ws.9 to 18 at any date as fixed by this Court.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with the present petition seeking to call for the records relating to the order dated 10.02.2016 made in Crl.M.P.No.144 of 2016 in S.C.No.6 of 2008 on the file of the Mahila Court, Tiruvannamalai, and set aside the same and permit the petitioner to cross examine the witnesses P.Ws.9 to 18 at any date as fixed by this Court. 2. The petitioner, who is the fourth accused in S.C.No.6 of 2008 on the file of the Mahila Court, Tiruvannamalai, facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 364 and 302 r/w. 34 of IPC. The charge sheet has been levelled a...
Sevugan and Another Vs. State rep. by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Sak ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records relating to the proceedings in C.C.No.68 of 2015 on the file of the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.68 of 2015 pending on the file of the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi, pursuant to the amicable settlement effected between the parties. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.285 of 2014 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) IPC, has been registered against the petitioners/A1 and A2. After completion of the investigation, the 1st respondent has filed a charge sheet, which was duly taken on file in C.C.No.68 of 2015 by the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners/A1 and A2 and the 2nd and 3rd respondents, appeared in persons and their ide...
K. Chinnasamy Vs. Muthukumar
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Feb-25-2016
(Prayer: This contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of the Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondent herein for wilfully disobeying the orders dated 31.07.2015 made in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14696 of 2015 on the file of this Court.) 1. This contempt petition has been filed for punishing the respondent herein for wilfully disobeying the orders of this Court dated 31.07.2015 made in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14696 of 2015. 2. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 31.07.2015, a case in Crime No.155 of 2016 for offences under Sections 147, 148, 427 and 506(ii) IPC has been registered on 15.02.2016. 3. In view of the above submission, this Court is of the view that nothing survives for further adjudication in this Contempt Petition. Hence, the Contempt Petition is closed. No costs....
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »