Chennai Court March 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.
M/s. SICGILSOL Gases Private Limited., (Formerly Known as Seva Gases P ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in TIN 33773464508/2013-14 dated 15.05.2015 and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and direct the respondent to pass assessment order afresh after affording opportunity of being heard as contemplated under Section 27(2) of the TNVAT Act, to the petitioner by this Court as this Court may deem fit and proper. Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in TIN 33773464508/2013-14 dated Nil.02.2016 signed on 01.03.2016 on the file of the respondent and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and against law and pass appropriate order passed by this Court as this Court may deem fit and proper.) Common Order: After some elaborate arguments, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that after filing of wr...
S. Mahubi and Others Vs. Hajirabibi (died) and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-28-2016
(Prayer in both CRPs: This Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Section 83 Clause 9 of TN Wakf Act, 1995 to set aside the order dated 19.04.2007 made in W.O.P.No.11 of 2000 and W.O.P.No.1 of 2002 on the file of Principal Sub Court, Madurai.) 1. This Civil Revision Petitions have been filed to set aside the common order dated 19.04.2007 made in W.O.P.No.11 of 2000 and W.O.P.No.1 of 2002 on the file of Principal Sub Court, Madurai. 2. The revision petitioners in both the Civil Revision Petitions are respondents 1 and 2 in W.O.P.No.11 of 2000 and petitioners in WOP.No.1 of 2002. The respondents 1 and 2 filed WOP.No.11 of 2000 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge (Wakf Tribunal), Madurai, for injunction against the petitioners and others from interfering with the Administration of Dhargah. The petitioners and others filed W.O.P.No.1 of 2002 for declaration that they are legal heirs of the one Syed Yakub Shahib. Originally, both the original WOPs were filed before Civil Court as O...
Mathivanan @ Sathish Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
A. Selvam, J. 1. This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the conviction and sentence dated 10.10.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.44 of 2012 by the Additional District and Sessions Court, Theni at Periyakulam. 2. The epitome of the case of the prosecution is that the accused 2 and 3 namely Chandran and Thilakavathi are the parents of the first accused viz., Mathivanan. The first accused has married the deceased by name Mariselvam prior to four years from the date of occurrence. At the time of marriage, the parents of the deceased have given Rs.15,000/-, gold jewels and other household articles. After marriage, the deceased and accused have lived in a joint family. The first accused has run an auto electrical shop. For the purpose of extending his business, he directed the deceased to get a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from her parents. The parents of the deceased have refused to concede the demand put forth on the side of the first accused and due to that all the accused have joined toge...
Sivakumar and Another Vs. The State represented by the Inspector of Po ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under section 374 Cr.P.C., to set aside the judgment of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tindivanam, in SC.No.95/2012 dated 21.02.2013.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are arrayed as A1 and A2 in SC.No.95/2012 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tindivanam. A1 stood charged for the offence u/s.302 IPC and A2 stood charged for the offence u/s.302 read with 34 IPC. By judgment dated 21.02.2013, the Trial Court convicted A1 for the offence u/s.302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment and convicted A2 for the offence u/s.302 read with 34 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default, to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants are before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecu...
A. Veeraiah Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order bearing No.Ni.Moo.No.3986/2011/N dated 07.02.2012 issued by the first respondent and quash the same and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. Today, when the matter was called, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that nothing survives in this writ petition and hence the writ petition is closed. 2. Recording the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner this writ petition is closed without prejudice rights of the petitioner to file a revision petition before the Revenue Divisional Officer.No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petition is closed....
Velu @ Velmurugan Vs. State rep. By Inspector of Police, Vellore Distr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment in S.C.No.252 of 2012 dated 13.06.2013 on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore, Vellore District.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.252 of 2012 on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore, Vellore District. He stood charged for offences under Sections 392, 394 and 302 I.P.C. By judgment dated 13.06.2013, the trial Court convicted him for the offences under Sections 394 and 302 I.P.C., and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (no default sentence was imposed) for the offence under Section 394 I.P.C., and to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (no default sentence was imposed) for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal. 2.The case of th...
Mumtaz Vs. Fathima Bi (deceased) and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order of the II Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai dated 05.01.2016 made in I.A.No.17034 of 2015 in I.A.No.20218 of 1986 in O.S.No.2331 of 1981.) 1. This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the legality and sustainability of the order dated 05.01.2016 passed by the learned Second Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai made in I.A.No.17034 of 2015 in I.A.No.20218 of 1986 in O.S.No.2331 of 1981 on the file of the said court. The matter stands listed today for admission. The arguments advanced by Mr.Praveen Alexander, learned counsel for the petitioner are heard. The certified copy of the impugned order, grounds of revision and copies of other documents produced in the form of typed set of papers are perused. 2. The 15th defendant in O.S.No.2331 of 1981 on the file of the II Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, i...
Singaram Vs. C.V. Sankar, IAS, The Secretary, Chennai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of the Contempt of Courts Act, to initiate contempt proceedings against the the respondent and punish him for the wilfull disobedience of the order of this Court dated 16.03.2015 in W.P(MD)No.20458 of 2014.) B. Rajendran, J. 1. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate submitted that the order passed in the writ petition has been complied with by issuing letter dated 22.03.2016 by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Chennai-9. He has also produced a xerox copy of the order. A copy of the order is also handed over to the petitioner's counsel. 2. Recording the above said statement, this contempt petition is closed....
Manickam Pillai Vs. The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram and O ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the first respondent in Pa.Mu.52393/2013(B6) dated 24.12.2014 and quash the same and pass further orders as this may deem fit.)1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the first respondent in Pa.Mu.52393/2013(B6) dated 24.12.2014.2. The only ground which has been raised by the petitioner is that the respondents 4 to 9 are at loggerheads regarding the title over the property. In fact, a counter has been filed to the effect that there is a dispute regarding the title. The District Revenue Officer who decided the application for patta, has no power to decide the title dispute. The title can be decided only by the civil Court. Now, he contended that he preferred to go before the civil Court.3. The learned counsel appearing f...
S.M. Shoba Vs. The Joint Secretary (PSP) and Passport Officer and Othe ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the Respondent No.2 to take necessary action to impound the Passport of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 in the light of section 10 of the Passport Act considering the pendency of the criminal case against respondent Nos. 4 and 5 within the time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Mandamus to direct the second respondent to impound the passport of the respondents 4 and 5 in the light of section 10 of the Passport Act considering the pendency of the criminal case against respondents 4 and 5 within the stipulated time. 2.According to the petitioner, the petitioner's marriage was solemnized on 11.09.2011 with one Saravana Babu. Even at the time of marriage and thereafter, the petitioner's husband, his parents, his sister the fourth respondent and his brother-in-law the fifth respondent have demanded dowry. Even though the...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »