Chennai Court April 2016 Judgments
V.B. Kamalanathan Vs. K. Jayasree and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petitions filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the order dated 17.03.2016 made in M.P.No.198 of 2016 in M.P.No.495 of 2012 in M.C.No.145 of 2012 on the file of the II Additional Family Court, Chennai.) 1. The Petitioner/Husband has focussed the instant Criminal Revision Petition as against the order dated 17.03.2016 in M.P.No.198 of 2016 in M.P.No.495 of 2012 in M.C.No.145 of 2012 passed by the Learned II Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai. 2. The Learned Learned II Additional Family Court Judge, Chennai, in the impugned order dated 17.03.2016 in M.P.No.198 of 2016 in M.P.No.495 of 2012 in M.C.No.145 of 2012, had observed and ordered the following: Petitioner/Wife Present Respondent/Husband Present Payment is not made. Wife insisted that arrest may be made. Arrest by 31.05.16. 3. According to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the trial Court had failed to grant time to file counter to M.P.No.198 of 20...
Tag this Judgment!N. Ravichandran and Others Vs. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by The Sub- ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to call for the records and quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.193 of 2007 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate II, Tiruppur.) The petitioners who are the accused 3, 4 and 6 in C.C.No.193 of 2007 have come forward with this petition seeking to call for the records and to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.193 of 2007 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Tiruppur. 2. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on either side. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that F.I.R. has been registered against these petitioners and other accused on 21.12.2001 for the offence punishable under Sections 120(b), 406 and 109 of I.P.C., but the charge sheet has been levelled against these petitioners only on 11.04.2007 after six years. The major punishment for the offence punishable under Section 120(b) of I.P.C. is two years. The major ...
Tag this Judgment!R. Sambath Chandra Vs. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Chenna ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 24.02.2016 made in W.P.(MD)Nos.12602 of 2013 on the file of this Court.) S.S. Sundar, J. 1. Aggrieved by the order of the Learned Single Judge, in dismissing the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.12602 of 2013, filed by the writ petitioner / appellant, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to quash the impugned order passed by the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District / the 3rd respondent therein, dated 19.07.2013 in Na.Ka.No.9503 of 2009, the writ petitioner has filed the above Writ Appeal. 2. Brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of the above Writ Appeal, are as follows:- The appellant / writ petitioner was holding the post of President of Kanyakumari District Co-operative Bank, from 23.09.1998 to 26.05.2001. During the tenure as President of the Co-operative Bank, it appears that the appellant / writ petitioner promoted one Mr.Henry Thangam from t...
Tag this Judgment!Gomathi Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Karur and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to file the Final Report in Crime No.24 of 2015 dated 25.09.2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent for offences U/s. 498(a) 294(b) and 506(I) of I.P.C. and proceed with the same as per law within the time stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. This petition has been filedto direct the 2nd respondent to file the Final Report in Crime No.24 of 2015 dated 25.09.2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent for offences U/s. 498(a) 294(b) and 506(I) of I.P.C. and proceed with the same as per law. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would submit that the investigation in Crime No.24 of 2015 has been completed and a final report has been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur the same was taken on file in C.C.No.30 of 2016 by the learned Magistrate. 3. Recording the said submission, th...
Tag this Judgment!Dharmaraj @ Dharmar and Others Vs. State through The Inspector of Poli ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No. 425 of 2016 in S.C.No. 177 of 2015 dated 21.04.2016 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai.) 1. This petition has been filedto set aside the order passed in Cr.M.P.No. 425 of 2016 in S.C.No. 177 of 2015 dated 21.04.2016 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai. 2. It is seen that these petitioners are facing trial for offences under Sections 448, 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC and Section 3(i) of TNPPDL Act before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai. While so, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 9 and P.W.13 on various dates and the accused did not cross examine the witnesses on the said dates. Thereafter, the accused filed a petition in Cr.M.P.No. 425 of 2016 in S.C.No. 177 of 2015 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall the witnesses. The Trial Judge, by order dated 07.04.2016 allowed the said petition on condition that the petitioners should p...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupur ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 27-03-2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.4323 of 2010 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Small Causes Court, Chennai.) 1. The Transport Corporation has filed the appeal aggrieved against the quantum of the award of Rs.9,49,000/- (Rupees Nine lakhs forty nine thousand only) granted by the Tribunal to the wife, children and mother of the deceased, who met with a fatal accident on 26-09-2010. 2. The case of the appellant is that the Tribunal has fixed the income of the deceased as Rs.7000/-(Rupees Seven thousand only) without any proof of income and the same should be fixed at Rs.6500/- (Rupees Six thousand five hundred only) taking into account the judgment in Syed Sadiq Vs. Deputy Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2014 (1) TNMAC 459), wherein the annual income of the deceased was fixed at Rs.6500/-(Rupees Six thousand five hundred only) in the absence of ...
Tag this Judgment!Selvaraj and Others Vs. Nagarajan and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal is preferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree, dated 28.04.2000 made in A.S.No.94 of 1999 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai, confirming the Judgment and Decree, dated 17.09.1999 made in O.S.No.393 of 1996 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Mayiladuthurai.) 1. The Second Appeal arises out of the Judgment and Decree, dated 28.04.2000 made in A.S.No.94 of 1999 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai. 2. This Second Appeal is preferred against concurrent findings of the Court below, dismissing the plaintiffs suit for declaration and permanent injunction. Unsuccessful plaintiffs are the appellants. For convenience, parties are to be referred to in their original rank in the suit. 3. The plaintiffs 2 to 5 are children of the first plaintiff. During the pendency of the suit, first plaintiff died. The first plaintiff s wife Thillai Ammal had originally purchased suit A sch...
Tag this Judgment!Chellaiah and Another Vs. S. Kuttaiyan
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for expeditious trial in O.S.No.146 of 2010, on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumayam.) 1. This revision is preferred for expeditious trial of O.S.No.146 of 2010, on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumayam. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and perused the materials on record. 3. Perusal of the 'B' diary extract would reveal much delay in conducting the suit in O.S.No.146 of 2010. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners /defendants submits that the present suit is the second vexation of the same cause, by a different person and the pendency of the action caused great hardship to the Petitioners. 5. In view of the above, the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumayam is directed to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.146 of 2010 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months, from the ...
Tag this Judgment!Ahamed Meeran and Others Vs. State Represented by The Inspector of Pol ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in C.C.No.339 of 2015 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.339 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, pursuant to the amicable settlement effected between the parties. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.6 of 2015 for the alleged offences under Sections 498(A), 406, 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of D.P.Act, has been registered against the petitioners/accused. After completion of the investigation, the 1st respondent has filed a charge sheet, which was duly taken on file in C.C.No.339 of 2015 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners/accused and the second respondent, appeared in persons and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition...
Tag this Judgment!Nachiarammal Vs. The District Collector, Tuticorin District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-29-2016
(Prayer: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.55 Lakhs as compensation with interest for having demolished the petitioner's Shops seven in number total extent of 1386 Sq.ft in S.F.No.696/1B1, Serakulam Village, Ramanujamputhur Post, Srivaikundam Taluk, Tuticorin District.) S.S. Sundar, J. 1. The Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.15959 of 2013 is filed by the petitioner one Nachiarammal, for issuing a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.55 Lakhs, as compensation, with interest for having demolished her Shops, seven in number, constructed in an extent of 1386 Sq.ft in S.F.No.696/1B1, Serakulam Village, Ramanujamputhur Post, Srivaikundam Taluk, Tuticorin District. 2. The petitioner has filed M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013 to pass an order of direction, directing the respondents to pay interim compensation for having demolished the petitioner's Shops, seven i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »