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.
Mary Selvi and Others Vs. Vannithangam and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Award dated 04.06.2012 made in MCOP.No.1335 of 2011 in Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / IV Additional District Court, Thirunelveli.) 1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Award dated 04.06.2012 made in MCOP.No.1335 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / IV Additional District Judge, Thirunelveli. 2. The appellants 1 to 4 are claimants in MCOP.No.1335 of 2013. The first respondent is the owner of the vehicle. The second respondent is the Insurance Company. 3. The facts of the case are as follows:- According to the appellants, the deceased was working as Conductor in Thirunelveli, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited. While he was travelling in the vehicle bearing Regn.No.TN 69 U 5482, on 26.08.2011, a Tata 909 vehicle bearing Registration No.72 AX 5289, belonging to the first respondent was driven in a rash and negligent manner and dashe...
Thamaraikani Vs. The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Divisional ...
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 Certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the impugned order in U/C.79/CBS/MDU dated 06.04.2016 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) B. Rajendran, J. 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 In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.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. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed....
P. Jemima Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City 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 a case on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 22.02.2016 within stipulated time and submit the report before this Honble Court and thus render justice.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 22.02.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that the complaint dated 22.02.2016 has been sent by post to the 1st respondent. 3. In view of the above submission, the petitioner is directed to appear in person before the 2nd respondent along with this order and lodge a fresh complaint, containing the very same contents as stated in the previous complaint dated 22.02.2016. On receipt of such complaint, the same shall be enquired into and action be taken thereon in accordance with law, if it discloses the...
M/s. Shona Readymades, Rep. by its Partner G. Ramasamy, Thirunelveli V ...
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 Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in TIN 33705580456/2014-15 dated 18.12.2016 and quash the same and to direct the second respondent to redo the assessment afresh after giving adequate opportunity to the petitioner and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in TIN 33705580456/2014-15 dated 18.12.2016 and quash the same and to direct the second respondent to redo the assessment afresh after giving adequate opportunity to the petitioner. 2. Mr. N.S.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. The only gro...
A. Louis Immanuvel Vs. State represented by The Superintendent of Poli ...
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 file a final report in Crime No.451 of 2013 within a time period stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to file a final report in Crime No.451 of 2013. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. It is seen that on the complaint given by this petitioner, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.451 of 2013 on 02.12.2013 under Sections 419, 465, 471 and 120(b) IPC against four accused. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai has closed the FIR in Crime No.451 of 2013 on 02.12.2014 by passing the following order: The above FIR is long pending before this Court for long time without any progress for filin...
P. Malaichamy and Others Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-13-2016
(Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent herein to register the complaint given by the petitioners dated 17.03.2016 and take necessary action against the accused persons within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. These petitions have been filed to direct the 2nd respondent herein to register the complaint given by the petitioners dated 17.03.2016 and take necessary action against the accused persons within the time stipulated by this Court. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioners, petition enquiry is pending in CSR No.55 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 order. The petitioners shall also cooperate in the enquiry. During...
K. Sathiyanarayanan Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai and Anothe ...
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 an FIR on the basis of the complaint preferred by the petitioner dated 14.03.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register an FIR on the basis of the complaint preferred by the petitioner dated 14.03.2016. 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 to the 2nd respondent, petition enquiry was conducted and the same was closed, as the offences arose within the territorial jurisdiction of E-1, K.Pudur Police Station, Madurai. 3. In view of the above, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to appear in person before the Inspector of Police, E-1, K.Pudur Police Station, Madurai and lodge a fresh complaint. On receipt of such complaint, the same shall be enquired into and action be taken in accord...
Paulsamy Match Works, Rep. by its Prop. M. Ravichandran, Virudhunagar ...
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 Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order of the fourth respondent in the proceedings in TIN 33495782671/2011-12 (Month of September 2011) dated 18.03.2016 received on 22.03.2016 and quash the same and to direct the fourth respondent to accord an opportunity of personal hearing and pass fresh order.) 1. The only point which has been raised by the petitioners is that they have produced the documents, namely, Form-H. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the authority has not directed them to produce any other discrepancies, however, the authorities concerned straightway ordered for return of refund amount. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions. 2. Since, the issue is involved in all these writ petitions are one and the same, all the writ petitions are taken up together. 3. Heard the learned Counsel appear...
K. Arun Prasath Vs. The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Division ...
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 first respondent to open the sealed covers in the presence of all bidden and confirm the quotation in their presence and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus seeking to open the sealed tender covers in the presence of the renderers. 2. Mr.S.Manohar, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents contend that it is not at all a tender and it is only a quotation for the interregnum period before the tenders are called for. Of course, there are four persons participated including the petitioner. It is opened and final result of tender was announced. The petitioner is a last person and the highest bid amount is Rs.84,510/-. Therefore, the qu...
T. Rajkumar and Others Vs. Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, New ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(Prayer: Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of (i) a Writ of Declaration to declare Section 94A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (as amended) as ultra vires Articles 14, 19, 51, 253 and 265 read with Entry 82 of List 1 of VII Schedule of The Constitution of India and also being beyond the legislative competence of Parliament under Articles 246 and 248 read with Entry 10, 14, 82 and 97 of List 1 of VII Schedule of The Constitution of India (W.P.Nos. 17241, 17408 and 17410 of 2015); (ii) a Writ of Declaration to declare Notification No.86 dated November 1, 2013 issued by the 2nd respondent under Section 94A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (as amended) as ultra vires Section 94A of Income Tax Act read with Articles 14, 19 and 265 of The Constitution of India (W.P.Nos.17242, 17409 and 17411 of 2015) and (iii) a Writ of Declaration to declare Press Release titled Concerning The Double Tax Treaty between Cyprus and India dated November 1, 2013 issued ...
- ‹ Prev
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- Next ›
- Last »