Chennai Court April 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.
Veerakumar Vs. The District Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai Town ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint dated 6.3.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint dated 6.3.2016. 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 06.03.2016, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed on 11.03.2016. A copy of the Closure Report has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar. Recording the same, this Criminal Original Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law....
K.S. Murugesan Vs. The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar District and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondent to register an FIR on the basis of petitioner's complaint dated 06.01.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondent to register an FIR on the basis of petitioner's complaint dated 06.01.2016. 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 dated 06.01.2016, it essentially appears to be a money dispute. Hence, no positive direction can be issued to the respondent police to register an FIR. 4. Therefore, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law....
Amuthavalli Vs. The Sub-Registrar, Theni
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent not to make any registration respect to the scheduled properties mentioned in the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2016 and pass orders within the stipulated by this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
S.R. Trust represented by its Board of Trustees, Meenakshi Mission Hos ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dated 11.02.2016 passed in I.A.No.378 of 2011 in O.S.No.320 of 2011 by the I Additional Sub Court, Madurai.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 11.02.2016 passed in I.A.No.378 of 2011 in O.S.No.320 of 2011 by the I Additional Sub Court, Madurai. 2. The petitioners are the defendants 1 to 5 in O.S.No.320 of 2011 on the file of the I-Additional Sub Court, Madurai. The respondent is the plaintiff. The respondent filed the said Suit in O.S.No. 320 of 2011 for declaration and permanent injunction. The respondent also field I.A.No.378 of 2011 for an order of temporary injunction and an ad interim injunction. The learned Judge by order dated 06.04.2011 granted ad interim injunction restraining the petitioners from preventing the respondent discharging the duties as Trustee of the first petitioner trust and Director of Academies as he performed ...
P.R. Roopashree and Others Vs. S. Gurumoorthy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.53 of 2013 in O.S.S.R.No.1339 of 2013(presently O.S.No.202 of 2013) on the file of the Principal District Judge at Thiruvallur presently pending before the I Additional District Judge, at Thiruvallur, dated 11.12.2013.) 1. This revision arises out of an order of the trial Court dated 11.12.2013 made in I.A.No.53 of 2013 in O.S.S.R.No.1339 of 2013(presently O.S.No.202 of 2013) on the file of the Principal District Judge at Thiruvallur, presently pending before the I Additional District Judge, at Thiruvallur 2. The plaintiffs in O.S.No.202 of 2013 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Thiruvallur are the petitioners in the present Civil Revision Petition. While filing the said suit, they filed an application in I.A.No.53 of 2013 under Order II Rule 2 of Code of Civil Procedure seeking leave of the Court to file a separate suit for comprehe...
A. Dhaveethu and Others Vs. The District Collector, Sivagangai and Oth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: Revision case under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code against the order dated 3.10.2011 made in A1-2228-11 on the file of the second respondent (Crl.R.C.(MD).No.863 of 2011) Revision case under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code against the order dated 8.6.2015 made in Na.Ka.A4/ 10773/2014 on the file of the first respondent (Crl.R.C.(MD).No.315 of 2015) Original petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records in Mu.Mu.5025/2014/A3 dated 31.12.2014 on the file of the Revenue Divisional Magistrate, Pattukottai and quash the same in so far as the petitioners are concerned. (Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4819 of 2015)) V. Ramasubramanian, J. 1. Many times, places of worship, to which people go, seeking solace and peace, become places where there is disruption of peace. No place of worship of any particular religion is an exception to this Rule. In 2 out of 3 cases on hand, the dispute relates to place...
K. Dhinakaran Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd Respondent to register the complaint of the petitioner dated 11.03.2016 against the proposed accused and proceed the same as per law within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Honble Court) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd Respondent to register the complaint of the petitioner dated 11.03.2016 against the proposed accused 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 on the complaint dated 11.03.2016, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed. A copy of the Closure Report is furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar. Recording the same, this Criminal Original Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate for...
A. Geetha Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District and A ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent herein to register the complaint given by the petitioner dated 30.12.2015 and take necessary action within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register the complaint given by the petitioner dated 30.12.2015 and take necessary action. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that her husband is going to Clubs for gambling and spending all her money. In this regard, she has given a complaint to the 1st respondent with a copy to the Chief Minister's Special Cell. 4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the complaint dated 30.12.2015 does not disclose a commission of cognizable offence to register an FIR. Hence, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to lodge a fresh complaint befor...
Masthan Vs. State, rep. by the Inspector of Police, Villupuram
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Tindivanam, Villupuram District, in S.C.No.297 of 2009 dated 28.03.2011.) S. Nagamuthu. J, 1. The appellant is the 2nd Accused in S.C.No.297 of 2009 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Tindivanam, Villupuram District. Including the appellant there were five accused in the said case. The trial court framed as many as five charges. The first charge was under Section 302 of IPC against A1 and A2; the second charge was under Section 364 of IPC against A1 to A5; the third charge was under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC against A3, A4 and A5; the fourth charge was under Section 201 r/w 302 of IPC against A1 to A5; and the fifth charge was under Section 120-B of IPC against A1 to A5. The trial court, by judgement dated 28.03.2011, acquitted A3 , A4 and A5 from all the charge...
Shyla Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register the complaint dated 11.02.2016 as a crime as against the said accused and there upon conduct investigation in accordance with law and file the final report before the court concerned within a time frame as specified by this Honourable court forthwith and pass such other or further orders as this Honourable court.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register the complaint dated 11.02.2016 as a crime as against the said accused and there upon conduct investigation in accordance with law and file the final report before the court concerned. 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 11.02.2016, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed on 16.03.2016. A copy of the Closu...
- ‹ Prev
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- Next ›
- Last »