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.
Vasantha and Another Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai and Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records pertaining to the order of detention passed by the 1st respondent herein and made in No.684/BCDFGISSSV/2015 dated 3.8.2015 and to set aside the same and directing the third respondent to produce the body of the detenue Tmt.Devi, w/o.Pushparaj now confined in Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, Chennai, before this Court and thereby setting her at liberty.) M. Jaichandren, J. 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the mother of the detenue, namely, Devi, aged 40 years, wife of Pushparaj, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records in No.684/BCDFGISSSV/2015 dated 3.8.2015, passed by the first respondent, detaining the detenue, under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982), branding her ...
S.M. Raja Vs. State Rep. by, The Superintendent of Police, Theni Distr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent police to register an F.I.R. Based on the petitioner's complaint dated on 18.01.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent police to register an F.I.R. Based on the petitioner's complaint dated 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 dated 18.01.2016, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed. A copy of the Closure Report has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar. 3. Recording the same, this Criminal Original Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to workout his remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law....
S. Sundar Vs. State by, Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to issue direction to the learned Special Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate Chengleput to receive the petition dated 22.02.2016 filed under Sec.70(2) Crl.P.C. and recall the NBW without insisting the petitioner to surrender in connection with a case in Special C.C.No.3 of 2014.) 1. A2 in the Special C.C.No.3 of 2014 on the file of the learned Special Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chengleput has directed this criminal original petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C aggrieved by the return of his petition filed under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C which has been to recall the NBW since the accused was not present in the court. 2. Petitioner/A2 is accused of having committed criminal misconduct and he is being prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The statutory formalities under Section 207 Cr.P.C was over. The case is coming up for further hearing. Lastly, it came up on 16.2.2016. On t...
M. Appas @ Khajamoideen Vs. State rep by the Inspector of Police, Than ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer:Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records relating to Crime No.446 of 2015 pending on the file of the 1st respondent / complainant and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed to quash the case in Crime No.446 of 2015, pending on the file of the 1st respondent police, pursuant to the amicable settlement effected between the parties. 2. As this Court is not inclined to quash the case in Crime No.446 of 2015, pending on the file of the 1st respondent police, on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties in view of the serious allegation levelled against this petitioner / sole accused, learned counsel for the petitioner/sole 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....
The Managing Director, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated 26.09.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.102 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (District Court), Thiruvarur.) R. Sudhakar, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded to the respondents/claimants in M.C.O.P.No.102 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (District Court) at Thiruvarur, the Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation, Villupuram has preferred this appeal. 2. It is a case of fatal accident. On 08.12.2011, at about 4.00 hours, when the deceased Henry was changing the tyre of the bus bearing registration No.TN-45-N-2667, belonging to the Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation, near Chengalpet GST Road, Tiruvarur, the bus bearing registration No.TN-25-N-0126, belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation, came in the same direction from Maduranthakam to Chennai, in a rash and negligent manner, hit t...
Lingesan @ Lingeswaran and Another Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Poli ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal as against the order dated 23.08.2012 passed in S.C. No. 181 of 2009 by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chengalpet.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are accused 1 and 2 in S.C. No. 181 of 2009 on the file of learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chengalpet. They stood charged for the offences under Sections 498A and 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. By judgment dated 23.08.2012, the Trial Court convicted both the accused under Sections 498A and 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year, for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. No separate sentence was imposed on the appellants for the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants are before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows: (i) The deceased, in this case, is one Gangeswari. The 1st a...
P. Palanichamy and Others Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register a criminal case against the proposed Accused Karnan based on the complaint dated 05.02.2016 preferred by the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 417, 420, 447, 465, 468, 469, 471 and 506(i) IPC and take action against the accused in accordance with law.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a criminal case against the proposed Accused Karnan based on the complaint dated 05.02.2016 preferred by the petitioner. 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.45 of 2016. 3. In view of the above submission, the 2nd 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 ...
A. Ramkumar Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner in the name of enquiry based on the 3rd respondent's false complaint.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents particularly the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner in the name of enquiry based on the 3rd respondent's false complaint. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that on a complaint given by the 3rd respondent, a case in Crime No.99 of 2016 for offences under Section 294(b), 406, 420 and 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of Women Harassment Act has been registered against this petitioner. 3. Under such circumstances, no positive or usual direction of not to harass can be passed in this petition and hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed....
F. Vinoth Daniel @ F. Michael Vinoth Sundra Raj Daniel and Another Vs. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
(Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal order, dated 10.09.2015, made in I.A.No.485 of 2015 in O.S.No.91 of 2014, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil.) 1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal order, dated 10.09.2015, made in I.A.No.485 of 2015 in O.S.No.91 of 2014, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil. 2. The petitioners are the plaintiff. They filed Suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession from the respondent and injunction. According to the petitioners, by mistake, the prayer for declaration and injunction was made instead of mandatory injunction. Taking advantage of this mistake, the respondent, filed an application in I.A.No.530 of 2014 to reject the plaint. The said application is pending. In the circumstances, the petitioners have come up with this present petition for amendment of the plaint in O.S...
Dr.D. Ramamurthy Vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I and Ot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the order of the 1st respondent made in Letter C.No.117(3)/ SP/PCIT-I/CBE/ 2015-16, dated 06.10.2015 and quash the same.) 1. The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent Letter C.No.117(3)/SP/PCIT-I/CBE/2015-16, dated 06.10.2015 and to quash the same. 2. According to the petitioner, the second respondent passed the order dated 31.3.2015 holding that the revaluation of the asset has to be taken as full value of consideration for calculating capital gains and has made additions to the capital gain as Rs.35,87,73,380/- and has assessed the capital gain tax at Rs.19,28,75,770/-, which includes an interest of Rs..5,16,50,775/-. 3. According to the petitioner, for the purpose of calculation of capital gain on transfer of assets from his proprietary ...
- ‹ Prev
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 61
- 62
- Next ›
- Last »