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.
Maruthamuthu Vs. State rep by the Inspector of Police, Karaikudi
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's complaint dated 21.01.2016 initiate appropriate action in accordance with law and register a case and investigate the same.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's complaint dated 21.01.2016 initiate appropriate action in accordance with law and register a case and investigate the same. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner, petition enquiry is pending in CSR No.27 of 2016. 3. In view of the above submission, the respondent is directed to expedite the enquiry and complete the same within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall co-operate for the enquiry. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, th...
R. Ponnuthai Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondent police to alter the FIR by including Sections 342 and 506(i) r/w 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act in Crime No.360 of 2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent police and to file a final report.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondent police to alter the FIR by including Sections 342 and 506(i) r/w 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act in Crime No.360 of 2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent police and to file a final report. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. On the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the respondent police have registered a case in Crime No.360 of 2015 on 13.12.2015 under Sections 323 and 294(b) IPC against one Renuka. It is the case of the petitioner, who is the defacto complainant, that the FIR should be a...
Gopal Vs. Natarajan and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
1. The judgment and decree dated 05.09.2003 and made in the appeal in A.S. No. 17 of 2003 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge (FTC.2), Cuddalore, confirming the judgment and decree dated 24.06.2002 and made in the suit in O.S. No. 73 of 1997 on the file of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore are under challenge in this memorandum of Second Appeal. 2. The plaintiff, who has lost his case before the Courts below, stands before this Court with this Second Appeal. 3. For the sake of convenience and for easy reference, the appellant may herein after be referred to as the plaintiff and the respondents be referred to as the defendants where ever the context so require. 4. Heard Mr. M. Gopal, who is party-in-person and Mr. K. Manikandan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3. 5. The plaintiff had filed the suit in O.S. No. 73 of 1997 as against the defendants seeking the relief of declaration of his title over "A" schedule property as well as th...
Duraisamy Vs. Krishnan (died) and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against fair and decretal order dated 02.07.2015 in I.A.No.716 of 2014 in O.S.No.781 of 2009 on the file of District Munsif Court, Katpadi, Vellore District.) 1. The plaintiff in the original suit O.S.No.781 of 2009, pending on the file of District Munsif, Katpadi, Vellore District, filed an application in I.A.No.716 of 2014 seeking the permission of the Court to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the very same cause of action. The said petition came to be filed under Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC. 2. The learned trial Judge, after hearing, dismissed the said application holding that such a leave could not be granted. As against the said order of the trial Court dated 02.07.2015 made in I.A.No.716 of 2014 in O.S.No.781 of 2009, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed. 3. If at all the plaintiff in a suit wants to withdraw the suit simplicitor, the Court cannot prevent the plain...
Megala Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent police to register a case based on the complaint given by the petitioner on 18.01.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent police to register a case based on the complaint given by the petitioner on 18.01.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would submit that on the complaint given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted in CSR No.18 of 2016 and the same has been transferred to the file of All Women Police Station, Porur, Coimbatore District. 3. In view of the above submission, this Criminal Original Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out her remedy in the manner known to law. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of....
Muthulakshmi Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 1st respondent to forward the petitioner complaint dated 30.01.2016 to the 2nd respondent to register a case for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC and Section of 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 4 of Prevention of Women Harrassment Act.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent to forward the petitioner complaint dated 30.01.2016 to the 2nd respondent to register a case for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC and Section of 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 4 of Prevention of Women Harrassment Act. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would submit that on the complaint dated 30.01.2016, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed o...
Ayyappan Vs. State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Vadaser ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District to expedite the trial in C.C. No.136 of 2014 within stipulated time that may be fixed by this Honourable Court.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District to expedite the trial in C.C. No.136 of 2014. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. Taking into consideration the nature of allegations, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District is directed to expeditiously complete the trial of the case in C.C. No.136 of 2014 provided the accused co-operates in conduct of the trial by cross examining witnesses without unnecessary adjournments. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of....
A.Vadivelu Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant police permission to conduct the Aadal Padal programme during Arulmighu Thiruvappur Muthumariyammal Temple Maasi Festival celebration on 11.03.2016 at Thiruvappur Village Pudukottai Taluk Pudukkottai District on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 06.03.2016.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the respondents to grant police permission to conduct the Aadal Padal programme during Arulmighu Thiruvappur Muthumariyammal Temple Maasi Festival celebration on 11.03.2016 at Thiruvappur Village Pudukottai Taluk Pudukkottai District on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 06.03.2016. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the villagers jointly decided to conduct Adal Padal on 11.03.2016 in connection with Arulmighu Thiruvappur Muthumariyammal Temple Maasi Festival celebration at ...
Balaji and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: These Criminal Appeals are preferred under Section 374 Cr.P.C against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned XVII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, made in S.C.No.61 of 2012, dated 01.10.2012.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in S.C. No.61 of 2012 on the file of the learned XVII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai. One Dinesh @ Dinesh Kumar was the 4th accused in the case. The Trial Court had framed as many as three charges against the accused Nos.1 to 4. The 1st charge was against all the four accused under Section 341 IPC; the second charge was under Section 302 IPC against all the four accused; and the third charge was under Section 506 (ii) IPC (3 counts) against all the four accused. The accused Nos.1 to 4 denied the same. By judgment, dated 01.10.2012, the Trial Court acquitted the 4th accused, from all the charges levelled against him and acquitted the accused Nos.1 to 3 from the charge under Section 341 IPC. However...
R. Athimuthu Manoharan Vs. State Rep. by, The Superintendent of Police ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 1st respondent to direct the 2nd respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 18.10.2015.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent to direct the 2nd respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 18.10.2015. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. On reading of the complaint, it is seen that the dispute essentially appears to be between son-in-law and father-in-law. Though learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petition enquiry in CSR No.385 of 2015 has been conducted and the same has been closed, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that petition enquiry is still pending. 4. Under such circumstances, this Court directs the respondent police to expeditiously conduct enquiry on the complaint lodged by the petitioner and take action in accordance with law...
- ‹ Prev
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›
- Last »