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.
Murugan Vs. State by The Inspector of Police, Namakkal Police Station
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer: Appeal Filed U/S.374 Cr.P.C., Against The Judgment Of Conviction And Sentence Passed By The Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Namakkal, In S.C.No.89 Of 2010, Dated 13.09.2010.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The Appellant Is The Sole Accused In S.C.No.89 Of 2010 On The File Of The Learned Additional District And Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Namakkal. He Stood Charged For The Offences Under Sections 302 And 201 Of Ipc. By Judgment Dated 13.09.2010, The Trial Court Convicted Him Under Both The Charges And Sentenced Him To Undergo Imprisonment For Life And To Pay A Fine Of Rs.5,000/-, In Default, To Undergo Rigorous Imprisonment For One Year For The Offence Under Section 302 Of Ipc And To Undergo Rigorous Imprisonment For 5 Years And To Pay A Fine Of Rs.1,000/-, In Default, To Undergo Rigorous Imprisonment For 3 Months For The Offence Under Section 201 Of Ipc. Challenging The Said Conviction And Sentence, The Appellant/Sole Accused Is Before This Court With This Appe...
M. Jahir Hussain Vs. State rep.by The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer: Criminal appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. against the conviction and sentence dated 14.09.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.67 of 2011 by the Second Additional District and Sessions Court, Tiruchirapalli.) 1. This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the convictions and sentences passed in Sessions Case No.67 of 2011 by the Second Additional District and Sessions Court, Tiruchirapalli. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.05.2010 at about 10.00 am, the witness by name Noorjahan has put up a compound wall. At that time, the accused 1 to 3 have hurled invectives against her by using filthy words. During the course of occurrence, the first accused has stated that he would kill the said Noorjahan. The first accused has tried to attack the said Noorjahan by using a bamboo stick. But he attacked the father of Noorjahan by name Baba Sahib and due to his attack, he passed away. After occurrence, the wife of the deceased by name Safiya Bi as defacto complainant has ...
Devi Venkatachalam College of Education, Vaniyambadi-Tirupattur Highwa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records from the first respondent in F.No. APS06238/B.Ed/TN/2011/28862 dated 28.05.2011 relating to the withdrawal of recognition to the petitioner institution, quash the same and further forbear the first respondent from withdrawing the recognition granted to the petitioner institution without following the due process prescribed under Section 17 of The National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993.) 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition praying to quash the order dated 27.05.2011 of the first respondent, in and by which, the recognition granted to the petitioner institution has been withdrawn. The petitioner also seeks for a consequential direction to forbear the first respondent from withdrawing the recognition granted to their institution without following the due process of law as has been prescribed under Section 17 of The National Counc...
V. Maharajan and Another Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai and A ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case based on the complaint dated 19.02.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case based on the complaint dated 19.02.2016. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that on the complaint given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry is pending in C.No.07/CSR/INS/CCC/MC with the 2nd respondent. 3. In view of the above submission, the 2nd respondent is directed to expedite the enquiry and expeditiously complete the same. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, the respondent police shall take action in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lalitha Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P and others [2013 (4) Crimes 243 (SC). In case of closure of the complaint, a copy of the closure report be furnished to the petitioner within a week of ...
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Trichy ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, against the judgment and award made in M.C.O.P.No.1989 of 2010, dated 12.03.2012 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, FTC.No.2, Tiruchirapalli.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal by the appellant Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kumbakonam Division II, Trichy ? 1, is to the finding, fixing negligence on the driver of the State Transport Corporation Bus, bearing Reg.No.TN-45-N-2614 and consequently, the direction to pay compensation of Rs.17,95,000/- with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim, till the date of realisation, to the legal representatives of the deceased. 2. Short facts leading to the appeal are that on 11.07.2010 at about 11 p.m., when the deceased Vasik Raja was riding Hero Honda motorcycle bearing Reg.No.TN-45-AZ-9193 on the extreme left side of Trichy ? Dindigul road, opposite to Aarthi Hotel, due to ...
Paulsamy Match Works, Virudhunagar District Vs. The State of Tamil Nad ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to pass orders on the representation made by the petitioner to the second respondent in his proceedings dated 15.02.2016 and to issue orders to the respondents 4, 5 and 6 to issue the refund vouchers by the 4th, 5th and 6th respondents tax amount Rs.92,10,637/- along with interest of Rs.5,55,338/-.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petitionis for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to pass orders on the representation made by the petitioner to the second respondent in his proceedings dated 15.02.2016 and to issue orders to the respondents 4, 5 and 6 to issue the refund vouchers by the 4th, 5th and 6th respondents tax amount Rs.92,10,637/- along with interest of Rs.5,55,338/-. 2. Mr.R.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal....
Chelladurai Vs. The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram District and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to dispose of the petition in File No.L1 21716/2015 to grant of patta for the property in Survey No.178/1 to an extent of 1 Acre 50 Cents in Mela Parthibanoor Group, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District within a time frame fixed by this Court.) 1. The petitioner has filed a Writ Petitionfor a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to dispose of the petition in File No.L1 21716/2015 to grant of patta for the property in Survey No.178/1 to an extent of 1 Acre 50 Cents in Mela Parthibanoor Group, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. 2. Even as per the affidavit of the petitioner, the petitioner earlier had approached the Sub-Collector, Paramakudi, seeking patta. The Sub-Collector, Paramakudi, has rejected to grant patta and directed the Tahsildar, Paramakudi, to re-classify it as a Government Poromboke land. But, the ...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Chennai Vs. Venkatesan and Other ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-14-2016
(Prayer: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, to set aside the fair and decreetal order, dated 03.12.2012 made in M.C.O.P.No.116 of 2012, on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Addl.Subordinate Judge, Karur), and allow this civil miscellaneous appeal.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the quantum of compensation of Rs.13,21,460/- with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation, awarded to the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.116 of 2012, on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Judge, Karur. 2. As the challenge is limited only to quantum, this Court is of the view that there is no need to advert to the findings, fixing negligence on the driver of offending vehicle viz., Lorry, bearing Reg.No.TN-23-7137 and insured with the appellant Insurance Company and consequently, liability fastened on the New India Assurance Company Ltd., Chennai / a...
The Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Kannur Vs ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 08.04.2015 made in M.C.O.P.No.10 of 2013, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Judge, Mahe.) S. Vaidyanathan, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/claimant. 2. Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Subordinate Judge), Mahe vide judgment dated 08.04.2015 in M.C.O.P.No.10 of 2013, the Insurance Company has come up with the present appeal. 3. In an accident which occurred on 27.09.2011, about 10.00 p.m., when the claimant, Rajesh was riding his motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA 36 M 947 slowly and cautiously on the extreme left side of the road near Mundayad Vaidyar Peedika stop at Elayavur, a jeep bearing Registration No.KA 36 M 947 which was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manne...
D. Percivul Pericles and Others Vs. R. Arunkumar and Another The Princ ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-11-2016
(Prayer: Petitions filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in Final Order dated 24.06.2015 issued by the Principal, Saveetha School of Law and quash the same.) Common Order: 1. The orders, which are impugned in these writ petitions, is a common and identical order passed by the first respondent. The respondents in all the writ petitions are common. In all these writ petitions, common arguments have been advanced on behalf of the petitioners and the first respondent. Therefore, all these writ petitions are taken up together and are disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners, who are pursuing B.A., B.L. (Honours) in the first respondent University, have come forward with these writ petitions, challenging the order dated 24.06.2015 passed by the first respondent. In and by the order dated 24.06.2015, the first respondent debarred the petitioners from attending the classes from 26.02.2015, the date of their sus...