Chennai Court June 2016 Judgments
M. Kaliammal Vs. The District Collector, Pudukkottai District and Anot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to issue a Patta to the extent of 3.41.5, 0.40.0 Ares bearing Survey No.35 situated at Nanjai Mangudi Village, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukottai Distirct.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. No counter is filed. 3. According to the Petitioner, she is in possession of wet land bearing Sy.No.35, measuring about 3.41.5, 0.40.0 ares in door No.31, Mangudi Village, Poovattakudi Post, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District. From the year 1987, she is in possession of the land and she is cultivating the said land ever since 30.09.1987. For every fasli, she had paid the amount demanded by the Government. As such, she is in possession and enjoyment of the land for the past 30 years. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that she had approached the first and second respondents several times seeking issu...
Tag this Judgment!M. Latha Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Karur District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to take necessary action to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and her husband, namely, S.Arun, S/o.Sankaran and his family members and consequently direct the 1st respondent to forbear the respondent nos.4 and 5 and the henchmen of the respondents 4 and 5 from interfering with the peaceful matrimonial life of the petitioner.) 1. The writ petition has been filed, seeking to direct the 1st respondent to take necessary action to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and her husband, namely, S.Arun, S/o.Sankaran and his family members and consequently direct the 1st respondent to forbear the respondent nos.4 and 5 and their henchmen from interfering with the peaceful matrimonial life of the petitioner. 2. Heard the petitioner / party-in-person and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the responden...
Tag this Judgment!K. Kalaiyarasi Vs. State represented by, The District Collector and Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-29-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records from the first respondent in N.S.A.No.01/2016, dated 21.01.2016 by setting aside the said order of detention passed by the first respondent and setting the detenu Kathirvelsamy, aged 39 years, S/o.Thenkarai Maharaja Thalaivar, at liberty now detained in the Central Prison, Palayamkottai.) 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the wife of the detenu, by name Kathirvelsamy, detained by the District Collector -cum- District Magistrate, Tirunelveli, by order dated 21 January, 2016. SUMMARY OF FACTS: 2. The husband of the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the detenu') was arrayed as an accused in Crime No.139 of 2015 under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. Since the detenu and his men murdered a member of Mohammedan Community, normal life has been affected throughout Eruvadi and surrounding locality. The police produced the detenu before the Jud...
Tag this Judgment!Nashath Jinan and Others Vs. The Government of India, Rep. by its Secr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the prospectus issued by the second respondent for the MBBS admission to the 2nd respondent institute for the year 2016 and quash the Clause IV (b) pertaining to Puducherry Unreserved (P-UR) category insofar as it inserts the following additional qualification in the prospectus children of the said employees should have studied in the Higher Secondary Course of Two years in any of the schools in the Union Territory of Puducherry and should have passed the Higher Secondary from the same School and direct the 2nd respondent to admit the petitioner as per the terms of the prospectus issued in the year 2015.) Common Order 1. The issues to be decided are common. Therefore, all these writ petitions are disposed of by this common order. W.P.No.14205 of 2016 2. The petitioner would state that his father Thiru A.P.Ishaque is a permanent Group A emp...
Tag this Judgment!The Government of Tamilnadu rep.by its Secretary to Government Environ ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2016
Common Judgment: Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J. 1. These set of appeals have been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge in directing the 2nd appellant-Managing Director-Tamil Nadu Tea Plantation Corporation Ltd., Coonoor, Nilgiris, to permit the 1st respondent(s)/employees to encash 50% of the unearned leave on private affairs, standing on their credit. 2. In W.P.7423 of 2014, the Writ Petitioner viz., P.Gurusami, sought to quash the order dated 07.01.2014 passed by the 2nd respondent-Managing Director, TANTEA, and to direct the said respondent to issue 50% of unearned leave on private affairs on retirement of the petitioner, on the basis of resolution dated 27 June 2008 passed by the Board of Directors of TANTEA. 3. It appears that by proceedings dated 07.01.2014, the second appellant/second respondent informed the Writ Petitioner/employee that there is no question of encashment of 50% of the salary by surrendering unearned leave in view of the absence of a provision in the Staf...
Tag this Judgment!Su. Shanmugam Vs. The District Collector, Trichy District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-29-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents 2 to 4 to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 03.03.2016 and pass an appropriate order on merits in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Hon'ble court on strength of direction issued by this Hon'ble Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. No counter is filed on behalf of the respondents. 3. It comes to be known that the petitioner along with his three brothers as early as on 03.03.2016 had addressed a representation dated 03.03.2016 (through RPAD) to the second respondent/District Revenue Officer, Trichy District, praying for proportionate, separate patta, based on the judgment passed in W.A.No.1210 of 2001 dated 06.07.2006 (in respect of 3 acres and 15 cents in their enjoyment) and it appears that till date, the said representation is pending. In this connect...
Tag this Judgment!Hajara Vs. The Secretary to the Government of India, New Delhi and Oth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-29-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records connected with the detention order in P.D.No.01-N.S.A./2016, dated 27.01.2016 on the file of the third respondent and quash the same as illegal and direct the respondents to produce the body and person of the petitioner's husband namely Altaf, S/o.Bagrudheen, aged 31 years now confined at Central Prison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District, before this Court and set him at liberty forthwith.) 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the wife of Thiru.Altaf, who is presently detained at the Central Prison, Palayamkottai, pursuant to the order passed by the District Collector and District Magistrate, Kanniyakumari District at Nagercoil, on 27 January, 2016 invoking the provisions of the National Security Act, 1980. FACTUAL BACKGROUND: 2. The husband of the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the detenu') was involved in two adverse cases, o...
Tag this Judgment!Rajavalli Vs. Subbarayan (Died) and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code to set aside the order dated 24.06.2014 made in I.A.No.948 of 2012 in O.S.No.355 of 2004 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge's Court at Pondicherry.) 1. Aggrieved over the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.948 of 2012 in O.S.No.355 of 2004 on the file of Principal Subordinate Court, Pondicherry, the first defendant has filed the above Civil Revision Petition. 2. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.355 of 2004 for partition. 3. Since the defendants failed to appear before the Trial Court, the Trial Court, passed an ex-parte preliminary decree on 15.04.2005. Thereafter, the plaintiffs filed the final decree application in I.A.No.1195 of 2005 for passing of final decree. The Trial Court also passed final decree on 08.10.2010. 4. Pursuant to the final decree passed in the suit, the plaintiffs filed an Execution Petition in E.P.No.19 of 2012 in the year 2012. 5. Thereafter, the first defendant...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendran Vs. State represented by Inspector of Police, Pennagaram Pol ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-29-2016
(Prayer:- Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri by judgment dated 05.03.2015 in S.C.No.12 of 2010 and acquit the appellant.) S. Nagamuthu.J 1. The appellant is A.1 in S.C.No.12 of 2010 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri. A.2 was one Mrs.Sevvanthi @ Sevanthiammal. The trial Court framed charges under Sections 302 and 323 I.P.C., against both the accused. By judgment dated 05.03.2015, the trial Court acquitted A.2 from both the charges however, convicted A.1/appellant for offence under Section 302 I.P.C., alone and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The trial Court acquitted A.1/appellant for the offence under Section 323 I.P.C. Challenging the above conviction and sentence the appellant/A.1 is before this Court with this Crimi...
Tag this Judgment!P. Radhakrishnan Vs. The District Collector, Sivagangai District and O ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-29-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to change the patta as that of petitioner to the property in survey No.259/16 measuring about 350 Sq.ft. situated in Maravamangalam, Kalaiyarkovil, Sivagangai District on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 21.06.2016.) 1. There is no representation on the side of the petitioner. However, there is representation on the side of the respondents 1 to 3. 2. According to the petitioner, the property in Sy.No.259/16 measuring about 350 sq.ft, situated in Maravamangalam, Kalaiyarkovil, Sivagangai District, originally belonged to one Harikrishnan. As a matter of fact, the said Harikrishnan had purchased the said property from one Sundaraja Chettiar by means of registered sale deed in the month of August 2015. In fact, the petitioner purchased the said property from the said Harikrishnan through a registered sale deed dated 03.08.2015. From the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »