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.
G. Baktavatchalam and Co., rep. by its Managing Partner, D. Thirunaray ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Original Side Appeals No.178 to 186 of 2013 are filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the Order and Decreetal order dated 13.03.2013 made in Application Nos..4384 of 2012 in C.S.No.862 of 1998, 4383 of 2012 in C.S.No.863 of 1998, 4382 of 2012 in C.S.No.864 of 1998, 4381 of 2012 in C.S.No.865 of 1998, 4380 of 2012 in C.S.No.866 of 1998, 4379 of 2012 in C.S.No.867 of 1998, 4378 of 2012 in C.S.No.868 of 1998, 4377 of 2012 in C.S.No.869 of 1998 and 4376 of 2012 in C.S.No.870 of 1998 respectively on the file of this Court.) Common Judgment: M.M. Sundresh. J. 1. In view of the commonality of the issues involved in all these appeals, they are disposed of by way of a common judgment. 2. The appellants, being the plaintiffs, have filed suits in C.S.Nos.862 to 870 of 1998 seeking recovery of money based upon the dishonour of the cheques said to have been issued by the respondents. 3. In the suits filed in the year 1998, the a...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this Writ Appeal is to an order made in W.P(MD)No.13613 of 2009, dated 24.02.2010 by which, the Writ Court, while setting aside the proceedings in R.P.No.11/06/D2, dated 10.11.2009 of the Commissioner, H.R.andC.E (Admin.), Department, Chennai, has permitted the writ petitioner therein, to participate in the adjudication process of O.A.No.21 of 2002. 2. Writ Appeal is filed with a delay of 935 days. Reasons assigned in paragraph Nos.8 and 9 are as follows:- 8. I submit that, from the inception I was entrusted with the responsibility of conducting proceedings before HR and CE department and this Honourable Court on behalf of other petitioners. During the pendency of the writ petition and subsequently, two of the original petitioners in O.A. No. 21 of 2002 who were arrayed as respondents 6 and 10 in W.P. No. 13613 of 2009 died. This and allowing of writ petition demoralized the other petitioners who were illiterate. I also fell ill around this time and wa...
Nagaraj Vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Krishnagiri
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Krishnangiri, in S.C.No.42 of 2011 dated 12.02.2013.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.42 of 2011 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri. He stood charged for offence under Sections 302 and 506(i) of IPC. The trial court, by judgment dated 12.02.2013, convicted the appellant under both the charges and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for offence under Section 506(i) of IPC and to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence under Section 302 of IPC. Challenging the above said conviction and sentence the sole accused is now before this court with this criminal appeal. 2....
Kuppusamy Vs. State rep by The Inspector of Police, Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Chennai in S.C.No.253 of 2007 dated 08.03.2012.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.253 of 2007 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Chennai. He stood charged for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. By judgment dated 08.03.2012, the trial Court convicted him and sentenced him to under go imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: 2.1. The appellant / accused is the father of the deceased Miss Varalakshmi. The accused and the deceased were residing in Kanu Nagar, Chennai 600078. She was hardly 16 years old. The ac...
A.I. Agnel Ilangovan Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order made in W.P(MD)No.9688 of 2015 dated 22.06.2015) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal, is to an order, made in W.P(MD)No.9688 of 2015, dated 22.06.2015, by which, the Writ Court has declined to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the proceedings in Na.Ka.No.36267/O.Na.3/2014-1, dated 07.05.2015, of the Director of Local Fund Audit Department, Chennai, 2nd respondent herein. The Writ Court has declined to grant any direction to the respondents, to sanction pensionary benefits to the appellant, in the post of Assistant Inspector and Deputy Inspector, in Local Fund Audit Department, for the period from 05.10.2001 to 21.01.2013, along with arrears of pension and other terminal benefits. 2. Facts leading to the writ appeal, are that the appellant resigned from service on 21.01.2013 due to family circumstances. It was accepted by the Director of Local Fund Audit Department, Chennai, 2nd responden...
N. Nainar Thevar Vs. The Executive Officer, Kanyakumari District
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 Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the files of the respondent pertaining to its order bearing Na.Ka.No.12/2014/A2 dated 11.03.2016 and the subsequent proceedings of the respondent bearing Na.Ka.No.12/2014/A2 dated 14.03.2016 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to extend the lease period for the further period of three years commencing from 01.04.2016 by accepting 15% over and above the existing lease amount paid by the petitioner by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 18.02.2016 within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.) 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of rejection insofar as the extension sought for by the petitioner as lease period is expiring on 31.03.2016. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the order is per se illegal as he stated that there are no arrears in respect o...
Sri Laxmi Exports Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-24-2016
(Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to release the old own used KOBELCO Hydraulic Excavator Model SK480 LC-8 detained on 15.03.2016 pursuant to his notice in Goods Detention Notice 665/15-16 dated 15.03.2016 immediately.) 1. The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to release the old own used KOBELCO Hydraulic Excavator Model SK480 LC-8 detained on 15.03.2016, pursuant to the notice of the 1st respondent in Goods Detention Notice 665/15-16 dated 15.03.2016. 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is the registered dealer under the TNVAT Act, 2006 and assessee on the file of the 2nd respondent. The petitioner was having one Hydraulic Excavator for their own use and the said machinery has some major repairs and not capable of being used for the past more than two years. At this juncture, the petitioner was approached b...
Tiruchendur Murugan (Education and Charitable) Trust, Rep.by its Chair ...
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 of the first respondent made in the notification bearing S.O.No.3518(E) dated 26.11.2013 issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi and quash the same and pass further orders 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 Certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent made in the notification bearing S.O.No.3518(E) dated 26.11.2013 issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi and quash the same and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) Common Order: In view of the fact that the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, these writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by a common order. 2. After some elaborate arguments made by both side...
Vijay Pradap Singh Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Kancheep ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 read with Sec. 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 20.01.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukkundram in Crl.M.P.No.3962 of 2015.) This revision arises out of dismissal of bail petition in Crl.M.P.No.3962 of 2015 filed in P.R.C.No.1 of 2015 under Section 330 Cr.P.C. 2. Petitioner is a CISF [Central Industrial Security Force] Constable. He was carrying out his duties at the Atomic Energy Power Station in Kalpakkam. On 08.10.2014, with his service rifle he is alleged to have shot dead three persons and also wounded one person. 3. Respondent police registered a case in Crime No.241 of 2014 under Section 307, 302 I.P.C. The case has been committed to the Court of Sessions. Now, it is pending in S.C.No.242 of 2015 before the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Chengalput. 4. While the said case was pending in P.R.C. No.1 of 2015 (Preliminary Register Case) before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirukalukundr...
Mary and Another Vs. State by The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed u/s.374 Cr.P.C., against the Judgment of conviction dated 04.11.2011 made in S.C.No.225 of 2011 on the file of the learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are the accused 1 and 2 in S.C.No.225 of 2011 on the file of the learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. They stood charged for an offence under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC. By judgment dated 04.11.2011, the trial court convicted them under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants/accused are before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief, is as follows:- (2.1) The deceased in this case was one Mrs.Sasi. P.W.1 is her sister. Sasi was already married to one Mr.Sekar. She had three children born throu...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »