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.
N. Pappayee Ammal and Others Vs. P. Ramasamy
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-23-2016
(Prayer in CRP.(MD).No.1063 of 2005: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC against the fair and decreetal order made in I.A.No. 385 of 2004 in ASSR.No.770 of 2004 dated 04.03.2005 on the file of the the District Court, Karur. Prayer in CRP.(MD).No.493 of 2006: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC against the ex parte docket order passed in E.A.No.123 of 2006 in E.P.No.52 of 2004 in O.S.No.804 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Karur.) 1. The Civil Revision Petition in CRP.(MD).No.1063 of 2005 is filed against the fair and decreetal order made in I.A.No. 385 of 2004 in ASSR.No.770 of 2004, dated 04.03.2005, on the file of the the District Court, Karur. 2. The Civil Revision Petition in CRP.(MD).No.493 of 2006 is filed against the ex parte docket order passed in E.A.No.123 of 2006 in E.P.No.521 of 2004 in O.S.No.804 of 2002, on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Karur. 3. Both the Civil Revision Petitions are dis...
Kumarasamy Vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thanjavur
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-23-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 04.02.2016 passed by the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Thanjavur in Crl.M.P.No.47 of 2016 in S.C.No.268 of 2013.) 1. This petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 04.02.2016 passed by the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Thanjavur in Crl.M.P.No.47 of 2016 in S.C.No.268 of 2013. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent. 3. It is seen that this petitioner is facing prosecution in S.C.No.268 of 2013 for offences under Sections 294(b), 353, 506(ii) IPC and 3(1) of TNPPDL Act. The prosecution examined five witnesses of whom the petitioner/accused has not examined P.Ws.1, 4 and 5. While so, the petitioner filed a petition in Cr.M.P.No.47 of 2016 in S.C.No.268 of 2013 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall the witnesses, which was dismissed by the learned Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Thanj...
T. Udayakumar Vs. T. Elangovan and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2016
(Prayer: Letter Patent Appeals are filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act read with Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act to set aside the order dated 10.03.2015 in Contempt Petition No.2825 of 2014 in Crl.O.P.No.11771 of 2014 on the file of this Court.) Common Judgment: M.M. Sundresh, J. 1. Contempt Appeal No.2 of 2015 has been preferred against the order passed by the learned single Judge in Contempt Petition No.2825 of 2014 in Crl.O.P.No.11771 of 2014 dated 10.03.2015, in which, a direction was issued to the Chief Secretary and Home Secretary to the State Government to consider shifting the appellants to some other place. As the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed a memo to treat the above Contempt Appeal as Letters Patent Appeal, the said memo was ordered on 15.03.2016 and numbered as L.P.A.2 of 2016. 2. L.P.A.No.2 of 2015 has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved over the findings rendered against him without even arraying him as a party respondent ...
M/s. Samson Maritime Limited, Rep. by tis Authorised Signatory KunalTr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-23-2016
1. (i) Application No.8191 of 2015 is filed seeking for the following relief:"To pass an order, directing the respondent herein, to disclose the details of fixed assets and bank accounts (along with the credit balance in the same) held by them in India?" (ii) Application No.8192 of 2015 is filed seeking for the following relief: "To pass an order, directing the respondent herein to furnish security to a sum of Us$ 3,087,432.36/- as on 19.12.2015 as per award dated 25.08.2015 and additional award 25.10.2015, within such time as may be directed by this Hon'ble Court, failing which this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an order of attachment of the bank account of the respondent in ING Vysya Bank, Mount Road, Branch, vide Current Account number CA A/c No.407011007792 (Amended as per order dated 29.02.2016 in Appln.No.991 of 2016. (iii) Application No.8193 of 2015 is filed seeking for the following relief) 1. "To pass an order directing the respondent herein an order directing the res...
S. Senthilkumar Vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-23-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records and quash the charge sheet laid against the petitioner in S.T.C.No.2829 of 2014 in Crime No.136 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, Dindigul District.) 1. This petition has been filedto call for the records and quash the charge sheet laid against the petitioner in S.T.C.No.2829 of 2014 in Crime No.136 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, Dindigul District. 2. As this Court was not inclined to quash the proceedings in S.T.C.No.2829 of 2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, Dindigul District, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 3. Permission is granted. This Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn 4. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a direction may be is...
M. Sarfudeen and Others Vs. Ushaman Ali
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-23-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 47 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 against the order passed in GWOP.No.19 of 2014 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Tirchirapalli, dated 30.04.2015.) 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against order passed in GWOP.No.19 of 2014 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Tirchirapalli, dated 30.04.2015. 2. The appellants are respondents and the respondent is petitioner in GWOP.No.19 of 2014. 3. The respondent filed said GWOP for custody of minor son Ashwaq. The first appellant is father in law of respondent and the second appellant is brother in law, son of first appellant, and the third appellant is wife of second appellant. The respondent is father and natural guardian of minor son. 4. The facts of the case are as follows:- (a) The respondent married first appellant's daughter Jerina Begum on 10.04.2006 as per Islamic Customs and Rites. After marriage, they were living in respondent's hous...
Chittu @ Chithra and Another Vs. State rep. By Inspector of Police, Er ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-2016
(Prayer: Common Prayer:- Criminal Appeals filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment dated 03.08.2012 made in S.C.No.32 of 2011 passed by the learned II Additional District Sessions Judge, Erode.) Common Judgement S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant in Crl.A.No.517 of 2012 is A.1 and the appellant in Crl.A.No.323 of 2015 is A.2 in S.C.No.32 of 2011 on the file of the learned II Additional District Sessions Judge, Erode. The trial Court framed charges for offences under Sections 302 r/w 34 and 201 I.P.C., against A.1 and Sections 302 r/w 34, 506(ii) and 201 I.P.C., against A.2. By judgment dated 03.08.2012, the trial Court convicted both the accused and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- each in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years (no fine amount was imposed for this offence) for offence under Section 201 I.P.C. The...
Nagaraj Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District and Othe ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-22-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to withdraw the case in Crime No.288 of 2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent and to transfer the same to any other investigating agency.) 1. This petition has been filedto withdraw the case in Crime No.288 of 2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent and to transfer the same to any other investigating agency 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would submit that charge sheet has already been filed in this case in Crime No.288 of 2015 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ilayankudi and the same has not yet been taken on file. 3. It is seen that the petitioner is an accused in this case. Therefore, the prayer sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted and the same is dismissed....
Pichaiya Vs. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-22-2016
(Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents herein to forthwith shift the Wind Mill Unit of the 6th respondent being erected and commissioned in S.No.96, situated at Ayyanarkulam Village, Alangulam, Tenkasi, Tirunelveli.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Mandamus to direct the respondents herein to forthwith shift the Wind Mill Unit of the sixth respondent being erected and commissioned in S.No.96, situated at Ayyanarkulam Village, Alangulam, Tenkasi, Tirunelveli. 2. According to the petitioner, he owns the land measuring to an extent 0.49.0 Hectares comprised in Survey No.98/2B situated at Ayyanarkulam Village, Alangulam Taluk, Thenkasi, Tirunelveli District. The petitioner has got dwelling house where he lives along with his family. There is also a well and a deep borewell and a pumpset motor with electricity service connection. Adjoining his dwelling house, there is a...
B. Rajeshwaran Vs. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable En ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-22-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for issuing a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in his Suo Motu Revision No.1 of 2014 D2 dated 15.09.2014 and quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondents from interfering with the rights of the petitioner to function as hereditary trustee of Arulmighu Bragadheeswarar Thirukoil, Peruvalanallur Village, Lalgudi Taluk, Tiruchirapalli District.) 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition questioning the correctness of the order dated 15.09.2014 passed in Suo Motu Revision No.1 of 2014 D2 by the first respondent and consequently to forbear the respondents from interfering with the rights of the petitioner to function as hereditary trustee of Arulmighu Bragadheeswarar Thirukoil, Peruvalanallur Village, Lalgudi Taluk, Tiruchirapalli District. 2. The facts which led to the institution of this writ petition and which are essential for disposal of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »