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.
Sai Petro Products, rep.by its Proprietor A. Natarajan Vs. The Assista ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writs of Certiorari to call for the impugned proceedings of the respondent passed respectively in TIN 33693303144/07-08 dated 7.7.2015, TIN 33693303144/08-09 dated 7.7.2015, TIN 33693303144/09-10 dated 8.7.2015 and TIN 33693303144/10-11 dated 8.7.2015 and quash the same.) Common Order: 1. Heard both. By consent, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner, who is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, has filed the above writ petitions challenging the orders of assessment for the years 2007-08 to 2010-11. For the purpose of disposal of these writ petitions, it would suffice to take note of the following facts : 3. The officials of the Enforcement Wing visited the petitioner's place of business on 17.9.2012 and 18.9.2012....
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, by its Manager Vs. Boopathy an ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, to set aside the Judgment and Decree in M.C.O.P.No.156 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Theni.) 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company challenging the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Theni in M.C.O.P.No.156 of 2012. 2. The brief facts are that on 27.03.2012 at 9.45 p.m, when the deceased Thonthiyammal was proceeding on T.Renganathapuram-Devaram Road from east to west direction, a motorcycle bearing Registration Nos. TN 63 S 7687, which was coming on the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner, hit against Thonthiyammal and caused grievous injuries. She was immediately taken to Government Hospital, Uthamapalayam, where she died on the same day. The claim was made by the legal heirs of the deceased alleging that the driver of the motorcycle was responsible for the death of...
N. Govindaramu Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police, Distr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the respondent to reinvestigate the complaint given by the petitioner dated 19.08.2015 within the stipulated time as fixed by this Honourable Court.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to direct the respondent to reinvestigate the complaint given by the petitioner dated 19.08.2015. 2. Heard the learned counsel on either side. 3. According to the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), based on the complaint preferred by the petitioner against the proposed accused, enquiry has been conducted and it has been subsequently closed. He has further submitted that a copy of the closure report has already been sent to the petitioner through post, receipt of which is also admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. The allegation in the complaint is that the petitioner had executed a Power of Attorney in favour of one Muthuramalingam vide Doc.No.187 of 2011 and pursuant to the execution of the P...
Mohammed Faizal Vs. The District Collector, Sivagangai District and Ot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd Respondent to conduct enquiry and pass final orders in the petitioner's patta transfer revision petition dated 20.04.2016 and 03.05.2016 on the file of the 2nd Respondent within time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the petitioner, one Mohamed Oli Bava Rowther owned certain lands in Melaiyur Group Village, S.S.Kottai Village, Thirupathur Taluk. He enjoyed the properties without any hindrance. He died on 07.05.1996 without any issues. It is represented on behalf of the petitioner that the brother of Mohamed Oli Bava Rowther viz., Syed Mohammed Rowther's son Raja Mohammed is treated as his son and accordingly, legal heir certificate was issued by the authorities in Pa.Mu.A6/7426/96, dated Nil.08.96. There is no dispute regarding the legal heirship ...
A.S. Palanisamy Vs. The District Collector and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent 1 to direct respondent 2 to consider the representation dated 14.03.2015 and 19.11.2015 by the petitioner and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner is a practising Lawyer and he would state that he owns a house at his native place namely, Andakotham Palayam, Erode District and to evidence the same, he has also enclosed election identity card. The petitioner submitted an application dated 14.03.2015 to the second respondent stating among other things that his parents namely, Songappan alias Songaan and Pavaayal alias Pavayee were residents of Old Door No.8 and New Door No.P36 of Andakotham Palayam, Erode District and they died on 09.07.1991 and 18.02.2005 respectively, leaving behind the petitioner's eld...
M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Saratha Shopping Centre Vs. Anbu ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated 21.02.2003 made in M.C.O.P.No.155 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate), Tuticorin.) 1. On an earlier occasion, there was no representation for the appellant. Hence, this appeal was directed to be posted under the caption 'for dismissal' today. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, Mr.Anand Chandrasekar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant represented that the entire case bundles have been returned to the appellant Insurance Company. 3. Though the appeal is posted under the caption for dismissal, there is no representation for the appellant. Hence, this civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed....
David Muthukani and Another Vs. The Inspector General of Registration/ ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.309/2010, dated 28.3.2013 and to quash the same as illegal and in violation of principles of laws and further to direct the third respondent to release the Document No.1655/2010, dated 09.07.2010 within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has made an endorsement in the typed-set of papers of the Writ Petition to the effect that the Writ Petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed. No costs....
David Raj Vs. The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Ch ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to settle the balance bill amount of Rs.2,87,000/- with interest at 18% for the belated payment period to the Petitioner forthwith.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the Petitioner, he is a registered P.W.D. Contractor and he had entered into an agreement with the Fourth Respondent/The Superintendent Engineer, Water Resource Organization, Public Works Department, Tamaraparani Basin Circle, Tirunelveli-2, for construction of certain additional infrastructure facilities in the existing Government Fish Seed Farm at Chittar Dam-II in Kanyakumari District, as per Agreement No.48SE/TBC/2010-2011. 4. The plea of the Petitioner is that he has completed the aforesaid work as per direction of the respondents 5 and 6 and supervision of the Assistant Engine...
K.A. Mohideen Meera Vs. The District Educational Officer, Ramanathapur ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of CERTIORARI calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent/ District Educational Officer, in Na.ka.No.483/Aa1/2016, dated 04.02.2016, registering the 5th respondent, as the Correspondent of the Muslim Higher Secondary School, Abirammam and quash the same.) Order: 1. The Petitioner has focused the instant writ petition praying for passing of an order by this Court in calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order, passed by the First Respondent/District Educational Officer, in Na.ka.No.483/Aa1/2016, dated 04.02.2016, registering the 5th respondent, as the Correspondent of the Muslim Higher Secondary School, Abiramam. 2. The Summations of Writ Facts 2.1. According to the Petitioner, he is the Correspondent of three schools viz., (i)Muslim Higher Secondary School, Abiramam; (ii)Abiramam Elementary School, Abiramam and (iii)Natham Elementary Sc...
M/s. Sun TV Network Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director K. Vija ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-14-2016
(Prayers: W.P.No.21810 of 2015 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2nd respondent in their order No.N-38014/10/2015-FM/596, dated 15th July, 2015 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1 and 2 respondents to permit the petitioner to migrate to FM Phase III Regime by allowing the petitioner to resubmit the bank guarantee and permitting the petitioner to participate in the forthcoming FM Station Phase III Auction pursuant to the Notice Inviting Application in No:N-38014/6/2013-FM, dated March 2nd 2015 for E-Auction of First batch of Private FM Radio Phase-III Channels. W.P.No.21811 of 2015 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent in their order No.N-38014/10/2015-FM/596, dated 15th July, 2015 and quash the same. W.P.No.11476 of 2015 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issu...