Chennai Court June 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.
K. Avudaiappa Vs. The District Collector, Virudhunagar and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-24-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to to register the Petitioner's name in the Contractor List of his office as Contractor to take contract works worth upto Rs.20,00,000/- by considering his application, dated 1.4.2016.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The grievance of the Petitioner is that he is having the legal and constitutional right to ask the Second Respondent/The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Union, Vathirayiruppu, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District to register his name in his Office Register as Contractor to take contract works worth upto Rs.20 lakhs from his Office. 4. It appears that the Petitioner's name has not been registered as Contractor to take up the contract works worth upto Rs.20 lakhs. As a result of which, there is deprivation of his right to work as Con...
Beer Mohammed @ Beer Maideen and Another Vs. State Rep. by The Inspect ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-24-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in Crime No.126 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same.) 1. Section 482 Cr. P.C., saves inherent power of the Court. Such inherent power can be exercised either to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Invoking such inherent power, this petition has been filed to quash the proceedings on the ground that the continuance would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. 2. A case in Crime No.126 of 2016 has been registered under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) IPC by the 1st respondent against the petitioners. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners and the second respondent, appeared in person and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) through the respondent police. 4...
A. Suresh Kumar Vs. The Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Tr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent in WP(MD) No.6653/2016 / TR 2079031785316 dated 5.5.2016, quash the same and consequently direct the respondent herein to issue passport to the petitioner in connection with file No.TR 2079031785316 forthwith.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. According to the petitioner, he is functioning as the Clerical Secretary of the CSI Trichy-Tanjore Diocese, duly elected on 15.04.2015. He is also a Governing Board Member of Bishop Heber (Autonomous) College at Trichy and holding a very important position in religious activities as Clobal Link Officer, CSI Trichy-Tanjore Diocese. 3. The stand of the petitioner is that he is the holder of Indian Passport from the year 1984 and also not subjected to any adverse remarks. In fact, the last passport bearing No.F7609479 was issued on 12.04.2006, which was valid upto ...
V. Kesavan and Others Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Theni and Anot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to direct the 2nd respondent to complete the investigation in Crime No.02 of 2012 and to file charge sheet before the concerned criminal court within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. Some of the accused, who are alleged to have committed certain offences under P.C.Act and Indian Penal Code, seeks direction to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anticorruption, Theni, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to complete the investigation in Cr.No.2 of 2012 within a prescribed time and file the final report before the concerned Court according to law. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are public servants. They are working as Assistant Engineers in Agricultural Engineering Department. They are under great mental strain and pain. However, there is no progress in the investigation of the case. 3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) contended that every step has been taken by t...
M. Abdul Jaffer Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur District ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.06.2015 within a reasonable time for removal of the wrong entry of Natham Puromboke in the A-Register on the file of the 2nd respondent in respect of Survey No.415/18 and 415/9.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the respondents. 4. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court praying for passing of an order in directing the respondents to consider his representation dated 05.06.2015 within a reasonable time for removal of the wrong entry of Natham Poromboke in the A-Register on the file of the 2nd respondent in respect of Survey Nos.415/18 and 415/9. 5. At this stage, the Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 brings it to the notice of this ...
M. Bharat Kumar Vs. Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, New ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 10.6.2016 and conduct elections to the fourth respondent Society in accordance with Gazette Notifications dated 13.1.2012 of the first respondent and Circular dated 6.12.2011 of the third respondent.) 1. The petitioner, who is working as Junior Accounts Officer in the Puducherry Electricity Department and a member of Co-operative Society from the Electricity Department, approached this Court, challenging the election notification issued by the third respondent for conducting the election for electing 9 Directors for the fourth respondent The Pondicherry Electricity Employees Co-operative Credit Society Limited. 2. The petitioner contends that he is actively involved in the affairs of the fourth respondent Co-operative Society and the election to the Society to elect 9 Directors under th...
Suresh Vs. State, by Inspector of Police, O.T.Police Station, Cuddalor ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Appeals against the judgment, dated 06.04.2013, made in S.C.No.124 of 2012 on the file of I Additional Sessions Court, Cuddalore.) 1. The appellants in Criminal Appeal No.296 of 2013 are the accused 2 and 3 in S.C.No.124 of 2012 on the file of I Additional Sessions Court, Cuddalore. By judgment, dated 06.04.2013, the trial Court convicted these two appellants/accused 2 and 3 for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, they have come up with Criminal Appeal No.296 of 2013. 2. In the above case, including the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.296 of 2013, there were totally six accused. The trial Court framed as many as six charges against all the six accused, as detailed below : Sl.NoAccusedSection of law1A.1294 (B), 148, 307 and 302 r/w 149 IPC2A.2294 (B), 148, 302 and 307 r/w 149 IPC3A.329...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
T. Raja,J. 1. The interesting prayer made in this Writ Petition is that when the petitioner, namely, Sri Amarvathi Spinning Mills made an application to the respondents to reduce his KVA due to recession in their production activity, the Superintending Engineer, Karur Electricity Distribution Circle, TANGEDCO, Karur, has refused to entertain their request citing an impracticable reason that a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No.8572 of 2011 is pending before this Court, whereas, the said Writ Petition was disposed of, in favour of the petitioner, as early as on 20.02.2016. The petitioner again renewed his request stating that their production has drastically come to an end due to various other reasons, yet, the request of the petitioner has not been considered forcing the petitioner to come before this Court. 2. Hence, notice through Court as well as privately returnable by 06.07.2016....
NGA Steels (P) Ltd. Vs. CESTAT, Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
S. Manikumar, J. Instant appeal is filed against the order dated 2-11-2015 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai in Appeal No. E/40772/2014-SM, arising out of an Order-in-Appeal No. 91/2014, dated 13-2-2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Salem between NGA Steels Private Limited and Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem. 2. Material on record discloses that being aggrieved by the order-in-original dated 18-5-2011, passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, an appeal has been preferred to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). 3. Before the appellate authority inter alia it has been contended that there was a violation of principles of natural justice in not permitting the appellant to cross-examine the persons from whom statements were recorded. By observing that cross-examination is not a matter of right, when burden of proof had been discharged by the department, the Commissioner of Central Exci...
Sam Vs. State, rep. By The Inspector of Police, Coimbatore
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Appeal against the judgment, dated 28.02.2014, made in S.C.No.42 of 2010 on the file of Sessions Court-cum-Mahila Court, Coimbatore.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. Appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.42 of 2010 on the file of Sessions Court-cum-Mahila Court, Coimbatore. There were four more accused in the case, arrayed as Accused 2 to 5. The accused 2 and 3 are the parents of the fifth accused and the accused 4 and 5 are the friends of the first accused. The trial Court framed charges under Sections 417, 366, 376 and 506-II IPC against the first accused and under Section 506-II IPC against accused 2 to 5. By judgment, dated 28.02.2014, the trial Court acquitted accused 2 to 5, but, convicted the first accused under Section 366,376, 417 IPC alone and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- , in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 366 IPC; to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fi...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »