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.
S. Paramasivam Vs. The District Collector, Theni District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus by directing the third respondent to allot pathway to the petitioner's temple namely Sri Ramapiran and Karuppasamy Temple situated in S.No.217/2 at B.Meenakshipuram Village, Bodinayakanur Taluk, Theni District through the Government poromboke land situated in S.No.217/1 as per the recommendation of the fourth respondent dated 06.05.2015 and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the third respondent to allot pathway to the petitioner's temple namely Sri Ramapiran and Karuppasamy Temple situated in S.No.217/2 at B.Meenakshipuram Village, Bodinayakanur Taluk, Theni District through the Government poromboke land situated in S.No.217/1 as per the recommendation of the fourth respondent dated 06.05.2015. 2. Mr.S.Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the r...
G. Janaki and Others Vs. C. Arasukumar and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, to condone the delay of 122 days in filing the above Criminal Revision SR.No.5072 of 2016 against the order passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, FTC, Alandur dated 04.07.2015 in Crl.M.P.No.1285 of 2015 in C.C.No.153 of 2014.) 1. The Petitioner/Accused has preferred the instant Crl.M.P.No.1422 of 2016 praying for passing of an order by this Court to condone the delay of 122 days in filing the Criminal Revision in SR.5072 of 2016. 2. According to the Petitioner/Accused, the Respondent/Complainant had filed a Petition under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act by using forged documents and further, the Respondent/Complainant had failed to explain the different signatures in Ex.P1/Pro-note etc. 3. The stand of the Petitioner/Accused is that he filed a Petition in Crl.Mp.No.1285 of 2015 on the file of the trial Court under Section 293 of the Criminal Procedure Code and also under Section 45 of the Indian ...
Geetha Vs. The Tahsildar, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District and Othe ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 to 3 from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful running of the proposed shop bearing in Survey No.155/30, Seemanoothu Panchayat, Usilampatti Panchayat Union, Madurai District, except due process of law and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. In view of the fact that the issue involved in all the writ petitions is one and the same, these writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by a common order. 2. After some elaborate arguments made by both sides, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners have been allotted the place for putting up the shops and they paid full amount to the fourth respondent, namely, the Panchayat President. According to the Panchayat President, the Panchayat also pointed out the place for putting up the shops. When the petitioners ha...
Nalini and Others Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police, Bo ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records in Crime No.189 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent and to quash the same as illegal.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records in Crime No.189 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent and to quash the same as illegal. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that investigation has been completed and a final report has also been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bodi on 16.03.2016. 3. Recording the same, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioners to work out their liberty in accordance with law. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed....
Christopher and Others Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Polic ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records as made in C.C.No. 164 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District by the 1st Respondent in connection with Crime No.166 of 2003 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Nesamani Nagar Police Station, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records as made in C.C.No. 164 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District by the 1st Respondent in connection with Crime No.166 of 2003 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Nesamani Nagar Police Station, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District and quash the same. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that trial in the case has commenced and about three witnesses have been examined. 3. Under such circumstances, this Court will not at ...
N. Sagayam and Others Vs. Prabhavathi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision filed under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the order passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram in C.M.P.No.941 of 2012 in C.C.No.501 of 2011 dated 27.09.2012.) 1. The Petitioners/Accused 2 to 8 have focused the instant Criminal Revision Petition as against the order dated 27.09.2012 in Crl. M.P.No.941 of 2012 in C.C.No.501 of 2011 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram. 2. The Learned Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram, while passing the impugned order in CMP.No.941 of 2012 in C.C.No.501 of 2011 (filed by the Revision Petitioners/Accused) under Section 245 of the Criminal Procedure Code at paragraph 9 had observed the following: 9.Sworn statement of P.W.1 and other evidences perused. Several authorities cited by the petitioners as well as respondent are not applicable for this case and at this stage. The merits and demerits of the evidence and acceptability of the same beyond all reasonable doubt can be gone into only at ...
Murugan Vs. The State represented by the Inspector of Police, Dharmapu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under section 374 [2] Cr.P.C., against the judgment passed in SC.No.46/2011 dated 09.04.2012 by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellantis the sole accused in SC.No.46/2011 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri. By judgment dated 09.04.2012, the Trial Court convicted the appellant/accused for the offence u/s.302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant/accused is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief, is as follows:- [A] The deceased in this case was one Mrs.Krishnammal. She was already married to one Rajendran, through whom, she had two children. Rajendran subsequently died. Thereafter, the accused developed illicit intimacy with the deceased. The accused is already marr...
A. Ayyansamy Vs. The Tahsildar, Tiruchendur Taluk, Thoothukudi Distric ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(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 impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 01.03.2016 and quash the same as illegal and pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.) 1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 01.03.2016 and quash the same as illegal. 2. Mr.S.Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. After some elaborate arguments on both sides, the learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that only insofar as the first clause in the order of the first respondent namely, to hand over the key to the police station, is alone objected. Both parties have decided to abide by the title as per the judgment to be...
Jagadheesh Pandian and Others Vs. State Represented by The Inspector o ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records originally in C.C.No.372 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Madurai and now in C.C.No.84 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Madurai and to quash the final report as against the petitioners, who have been arrayed as the accused.) 1. This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records originally in C.C.No.372 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Madurai and now in C.C.No.84 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Madurai and to quash the final report as against the petitioners, who have been arrayed as the accused. 2. It is seen that the FIR in this case has been registered on the complaint lodged by the Inspector, H.R.andC.E. Department. The case of the prosecution is that the Temple in question is administered by the H.R.andC.E. Department. On prior intelligence that monies are being stolen from the hundial, th...
Mohan Vs. The Secretary to the Government, Chennai and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-11-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent dated 2.11.2015 in C3.D.O.No.106/2015 against the petitioner brother Sugumar, male, aged 25 years, s/o.Dasarathan, who is confined at Central Prison, Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.) M. Jaichandren, J. 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the brother of the detenu, namely, Sugumar, aged 25 years, son of Dasarathan, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records in C3.D.O.No.106/2015, dated 2.11.2015, passed by the 2nd respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabb...
- ‹ Prev
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- Next ›
- Last »