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.
Mahendran Vs. The District Collector, Sivagangai District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents or any men claiming under them from excavating gravel in Perattukottai Kanmai, Perttukottai Village, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District.) 1. Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. According to the petitioner, the Perattukottai Kanmoi is situated in Survey No.86 of Perattukottai Village and it has got an ayacut about 320 acres of lands. He is one of the Ayacudars of the aforesaid Kanmoi and many families solely depend upon the aforesaid agricultural lands. 3. The stand of the petitioner is that he came to know that the Fifth Respondent/President, Village Panchayat, Aaravayal, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District, had passed a resolution enabling certain persons to excavate gravel in the above stated Kanmoi. Also, it is understood that the First respondent/District Co...
Azad Matriculation School, Represented by its Secretary and Correspond ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to accord the Status of a Religious Minority Educational Institution to the Petitioner-School, by considering the application preferred by the Petitioner, dated 04.06.2014 within the time frame 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 Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.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 Petition is dismissed. No costs....
G. Suresh Murthy Vs. Uma
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, against the fair and decretal order, dated 28.12.2010 passed in O.P.No.1947 of 2008 on the file of the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai.) P. Kalaiyarasan, J. 1. The husband, as appellant has challenged the order, dated 28.12.2010 passed in O.P.No.1947 of 2008 by the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Chennai, dismissing the O.P for Divorce, on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. 2. The appellant, as petitioner has filed the petition in question under Section 13 (1) (i-a), (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, praying to dissolve the marriage, held in between him and the respondent. 3. The averments of the petition in brief are : (i) The petitioner married the respondent as per Hindu rites and customs on 19.06.2003 at Padi, Chennai - 600 050. The marriage was arranged one. The petitioner being only son to his parents was confident of helping them at their old age with the ...
M. Suresh and Another Vs. The T.N. Dr. MGR Medical University, Rep. by ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
(Prayer: W.P.Nos.10050 and 10051 of 2012 are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to order No.02/2012 dated 20.1.2012 in reference No.E1(4)/02206/2012 of the first respondent herein, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to refix the seniority of the petitioners in the post of Assistant Section Officer in accordance with the date of first appointment as Steno-Typist Grade III with all attendant benefits. W.P.No.13741 of 2011 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings dated 8.6.2011 in R.C.No.E1(4) 11820/2009 of the first respondent and the order dated 26.10.2010 in R.C.No.E1(4)22313/2010 of the second respondent herein and quash the same and direct the respondents to refix the seniority of the petitioner in the post of Assistant...
S. Geetha Ranjani Vs. Rabindranath Tagore and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
Prayer:Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying this Court to punish the respondents for their wilful disobedience of the order made in W.P.No.17794 of 2014, dated 5.11.2014, on the file of this Court. 1. It is brought to the notice of this Court on behalf of the respondents that in C.M.P(MD)No.1354 of 2016 in W.A(MD)No.260 of 2016 on 26.2.2016, this Court has granted an order of interim stay of the order, dated 5.11.2014 passed in W.P.No.17794 of 2014. 2. In view of the interim stay is granted in C.M.P(MD)No.1354 of 2016 in W.A(MD)No.260 of 2016 on 26.2.2016, the learned counsel for the Petitioner has made an endorsement in the Contempt Petition, inter-alia to the effect that ''......at this stage, the Petitioner has not pressed the Contempt''. 3. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the Contempt Petition is closed....
A. Periyasamy Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District an ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
(Prayer:Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register the case base upon the petitioners complaint dated 12.04.2016.) 1. It is an application seeking a direction to the second respondent to register a case based on the petitioner's complaint dated 12.04.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent. 3. The sum and substance of the complaint of the petitioner is that due to money dispute, the proposed accused entered into the house of the petitioner and attacked him. Hence the petitioner has given a complaint to the respondents. Since action has not been taken, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondents would submit that already both parties were enquired and they have been directed to approach the civil Court for appropriate remedy. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit th...
Subramanian Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police, Nagapattinam Distri ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Court / Fast Track Mahila Court, Nagapattinam, dated 10.08.2015 in S.C.No.50 of 2014.) 1. Though the petition of the appellant/accused, seeking suspension of sentence in M.P.No.1 of 2015 is listed for disposal, in view of settlement arrived at between parties and on the consent of the learned counsel appearing on both sides, the appeal itself is taken up for disposal. 2. This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgment dated 10.08.2015 in S.C.No.50 of 2014 on the file of the Sessions Court / Fast Track Mahila Court, Nagapattinam, convicting the appellant/accused for the offence under Section 307 IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. He was acquitted by the trial Court in respect of the charge under Section 294(b) IPC. 3. The gist of ...
Dhanasekar Vs. State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Thiruvallur Dist ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. challenging the conviction and sentences imposed on the appellants by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram [Fast Track Mahila Court], Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur District in S.C.No.85 of 2013 dated 19.09.2014.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.85 of 2013 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram [Fast Track Mahil Court], Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur District. He stood charged for offences under Sections 302 r/w 109 and 306 of IPC. The trial court, by judgment dated 19.09.2014, convicted the appellant under Sections 302 r/w 109 and 306 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year for offence under Section 302 r/w 109 of IPC; and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year for offe...
The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs. U. Eswaran
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
1. The respondent filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the respondent's service from 01.09.1991 in maintaining the list proposed for appointment of Casual Labour as TCL Assessor in the appellant organisation. 2. The only question raised was from which date the respondent is eligible, as he claimed that it was in the year 01.09.1991, he was first engaged and that erroneously his date of engagement has been mentioned in the register as 01.09.1996. This wrong entry had resulted in his juniors engaged as contract labour during the year 1994, having been shown as seniors to the respondent and the grievance of the respondent had not been redressed despite representations. 3. The appellant before us choose not to file any counter affidavit despite the matter pending for six years and repeated adjournments. Other than orally stating that the respondent had been engaged only from 01.09.1996, no...
V. Rengammal Vs. The Manager, Life Insurance Corporation, S.S.S. Depar ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-09-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the claim application filed by the Petitioner, dated 8.3.2013 for Policy Nos.756615211, 751587342 and 753601560, on the file of the first respondent.) The Petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition praying for passing of an by this Court in directing the First Respondent/The Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Chennai-2 to consider her claim application, dated 8.3.2013, in respect of Policy Nos.756615211, 751587342 and 753601560. 2. The case of the Petitioner is that the Second Respondent, her Daughter-in-Law got married with her son Chinnadurai on 6.6.2012. At the time of marriage, the Petitioner's son was serving as Grade-I Police Constable in ''Q'' Branch Police in Chennai. He took three Insurance Policies from the First Respondent/The Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Anna Salai, Chennai ...
- ‹ Prev
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- Next ›
- Last »