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.
Uma Maheswari Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd Respondent to register the FIR on the basis of the complaint dated 07.03.2016 received by the respondents on 08.03.2016 and take action as per law and thus render justice.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd Respondent to register the FIR on the basis of the complaint dated 07.03.2016 received by the respondents on 08.03.2016 and take action as per law. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that the complaint dated 07.03.2016 has been sent by post to the respondents. 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 07.03.2016. On receipt of such complaint, the same shall be enquired into and action be taken thereon in...
M/s. Rainbow Foundations Ltd., Chennai Vs. The Authorized Officer, Sta ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to register and return the Sale Certificate issued by the 1st respondent dated 23.03.2016.) 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to register and return the Sale Certificate issued by the 1st respondent-Bank dated 23.03.2016. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it has been averred by the petitioner, inter alia, as follows:- 2-1. The petitioner-Company is a Public Limited Company duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The State Bank of India, the 1st respondent herein, had issued E-Auction Sale Notice dated 13.01.2016 for sale of the property being vacant land situated at Old Door No.58, then Nos.74 and 75, Present Door Nos.177 and 179, Purasawalkam High Road, Chennai, in R.S.No.121/1 of Block No.5, Purasawalkam Divisio...
Nokia India Sales Private Limited rep. by its Authorized Signatory Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(Prayer: APPEALS under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the common order dated 15.07.2015 in W.P.Nos.21265 and 21266 of 2014.) Common Judgment V. Ramasubramanian, J 1. The appeals arise out of a common order passed by the learned Judge dismissing the writ petitions filed by the appellant, questioning the orders of assessment relating to the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14 under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the TNVAT Act, 2006). 2. We have heard Mr.Arvind P.Datar and Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.AL.Somayaji, learned Advocate General assisted by Dr.Anitha Sumanth, learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing for the respondents. BACKGROUND FACTS 3. The appellant is a company having a unit located in the Special Economic Zone at Sriperumbudur. The unit of the appellant was issued with a Letter of Approval dated 7.3.2011 by the Competent Authority for the setting up of a unit for the pur...
Kavitha and Another Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Uthamapalayam ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(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 with the impugned notice issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.0273/2016/A4 dated 03.02.2016 in connection with the petition filed by the respondents 3 and 4 and quash the same as illegal without jurisdiction and pass further relieves as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating with the impugned notice issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.0273/2016/A4 dated 03.02.2016 in connection with the petition filed by the respondents 3 and 4 and quash the same as illegal. 2. Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.T.Senthilkumar, learned Counsel takes notice for the respondents 3 and 4. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner has chal...
Chellaiah Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the petitioner's complaint dated 13.2.2016 and may complete the investigation of the matter within a specified period.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the petitioner's complaint dated 13.2.2016 and may complete the investigation of the matter within a specified period. 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 13.02.2016, 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. 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 l...
R. Subramani Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register the FIR based on the complaint given by the petitioner on 9.9.2015.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register the FIR based on the complaint given by the petitioner on 9.9.2015. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would submit that the complaint dated 09.09.2015 has been sent to the Chief Minister's Special Cell. 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 09.09.2015. On receipt of such complaint, the same shall be enquired into and action be taken thereon in accordance with law, if it discloses the commission of a cognizable offence or drop action otherwise. W...
Murali Vs. State Rep. by its Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.78 of 2011 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu. He stood charged for offence under Section 302 of IPC. The trial court, by judgement dated 09.04.2013, convicted the appellant under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of six months. Challenging the above said conviction and sentence, the sole accused has come up with the present criminal appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:- The deceased in this case was one Mrs.Suganya. The accused is her husband. The marriage between them was solemnized two years before the occurrence. Though initially the marital life was smooth, in due course of time, the accused developed suspicion over the fidelity of the deceased. On account of the same, it is alleged that on 13.03.2011, when the deceased was cooking j...
J.A. Premkumar Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 2.2.2016 and investigate the same in accordance with law.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 2.2.2016 and investigate the same in accordance with 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 02.02.2016, given by the petitioner, a petition enquiry was conducted and the same was subsequently closed on 18.02.2016. 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 workout his remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law....
R. Rajathi Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(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 of the petitioner dated 4.2.2016 in accordance with law.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint of the petitioner dated 4.2.2016 in accordance with law. 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 04.02.2016, it essentially appears to be a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and her husband and that HMOP No.44 of 2015 filed by this petitioner for divorce is also pending. Her husband also filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Under such circumstances, no positive direction can be issued to the respondent police to register an FIR. Hence, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out her remedy before the appropriate forum in the man...
S. Suresh Vs. S. Alavandar and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-12-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree, dated 07.06.2002, made in M.C.O.P.No.674 of 2000, on the file of the Additional District/Fast Track Court [Motor Accident Claims Tribunal], Thanjavur.) 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree, dated 07.06.2002, made in M.C.O.P.No.674 of 2000, on the file of the Additional District/Fast Track Court [Motor Accident Claims Tribunal], Thanjavur. 2. The appellant is the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.674 of 2000. He filed M.C.O.P., claiming a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- for the injury sustained by him in the accident occurred on 09.07.1999. Respondents 1 and 3 are the owners of the vehicle involved in the accident. Respondents 2 and 4 are the insurer of the vehicle belonging to the respondents 1 and 3. 3. Facts of the case: (i) According to the appellant, he was travelling in a motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-22-6289, belonging to the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- Next ›
- Last »