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.
Mervin Babu Vs. State, Represented by its Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.2546 of 2015, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri, dated 28.04.2015 and set aside the same.) 1. Dissatisfied with the dismissal of his discharge petition in Cr.M.P.No.3272 of 2014 in S.T.C.No.225 of 2014, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Tirunelveli, the accused has directed this revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, actually aggrieved persons have not preferred any complaint in this case. Further, in order to wreck vengeance, this case has been foisted against the petitioner. Before filing final report, no preliminary enquiry was conducted. The Trial Court has missed the vital aspect. Thus, in the Trial Court the accused has missed the bus. 3. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the Trial Court has rightly c...
Arulmighu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukoil Parambarai Maruthuvar Sangam, Vs. ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned notification in Na.Ka.No.13 of 2016/A2, dated 13.05.2016 issued by the second respondent and to quash the same insofar as item NO.2 is concerned.) 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/Sangam, Arulmighu Pandimuneeswarar Thirukkoil is in existence for more than 100 years being worshipped by large number of devotees hailing from different communities. The devotees come to the temple campus and as a part of ''Vendhuthal'', they have their hair tonsured. The tonsuring is done by barbers, who belong to three families namely (1) Irulappadass family (2) Palani Family and (3) Pitchaikaran Family. Presently, there are about 50 families who are the branches of these three families. 4. The stand of the Petitioner is that ...
Nagoor Meeran Vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Chennai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Section 397(1) r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crl.M.P.N o.1598 of 2015 dated 11.04.2016 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge for CBI Cases, Madurai, Madurai District and set aside the order dated 11.04.2016 and return the Passport No.Z3126909 (latest) to the petitioner.) 1. This revision arises out of dismissal of Crl.M.P.No.1598 of 2015 in C.C.No.1 of 2016, which has been filed for return of latest passport, namely, Passport No.Z3126909 of the revision petitioner. 2. The petitioner is A3. He came to be booked by the Inspector of Police, CBI : ACB: Chennai in R.C. MA1 2015 A 0010. In the course of investigation his passports have been seized and produced before the II Additional District Judge for CBI Cases, Madurai. In Crl.M.P.No.1598 of 2015, he sought for return of his latest passport. His plea has been opposed by the CBI tooth and nail. The trial Court held that for mere asking a passport cannot be ...
P.M. Ponkumar Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents to conduct enquiry and register a case in complaint dated 24.03.2016 against the proposed accused persons and pass such or other orders as this Honourable Court.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondents to conduct enquiry and register a case in complaint dated 24.03.2016 against the proposed accused persons. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that the complaint of the petitioner has been transferred to the file of the Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District, in which, petition enquiry is pending. Therefore, the Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District is suo motu added as the third respondent to this petition. 3. The allegation in the complaint is that the proposed accused persons, who were managing the petitioner's company at the time of his illnes...
Palanisamy and Another State Rep. by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., to call for the records in S.C.No.126 of 2012 on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur and set aside the judgment dated 18.07.2013.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are A.1 and A.2 respectively in S.C.No.126 of 2012, on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruppur. They stood charged for offences under Sections 302, 201 and 404 I.P.C. By judgment dated 18.03.2013, the trial Court convicted both the accused under all the 3 charges and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for offence under Section 302 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months for offence under Section 201 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to underg...
K. Muthu Vs. The District Collector, Sivagangai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(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 dispose of the Petitioner's representation, dated 16.03.2016 and consequently to direct the third respondent to do the survey of the Petitioner's land within the time frame fixed by this Court.) 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 his representation, dated 16.03.2016 addressed to the second respondent/The Tahsildar, Thirupattur Taluk, Sivagangai District has not been considered till date and on account of that, he has filed the present Writ Petition before this Court. 4. A perusal of the representation, dated 16.03.2016 addressed to the second respondent/The Tahsildar, Thirupattur Taluk, Sivagangai indicates that the Petitioner prays for measurement of land and for that, a direction be issued to the third respondent/Th...
K. Kandasamy Vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thirunelveli
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Senkottai in Cr.M.P.No.2023 of 2016, by order, dated 12.04.2016 and set aside the same and grand interim custody of the paddy harvest machine bearing Engine No.KXEM-012176, Chassis No.KARTAR-3500G/E/09/0189 and color in Green to the petitioner.) 1. This matter is squarely covered by the Apex Court's Judgment in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat [2003 (1) CTC 175 (SC)]. 2. This revision arises out of dismissal of the property return petition in Cr.M.P.No.2023 of 2016, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Senkottai. 3. The de facto complainant's son has lost his life in a Paddy Harvesting Machine. It belongs to the petitioner. He filed a petition for return of the same. It was dismissed by the learned Magistrate on the ground that it was not registered under M.V.Act and not insured. 4. Aggrieved, this revision has been dire...
S. Panneer Vs. The Superintendent of Police and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2nd respondent to register an FIR on basis of the complaint of the petitioner dated 12.04.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register an FIR on basis of the complaint of the petitioner dated 12.04.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who would submit that on the complaint dated 12.04.2016, given by the petitioner, a case has already been registered in Crime No.108 of 2016 dated 05.06.2016 for offences under Sections 294(b) and 506(2) IPC. The said statement is recorded. 3. In view of the above statement made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), nothing survives for further adjudication in this petition. Hence, the Criminal Original Petition is closed....
Dr. P. Shakunthala Vs. Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribut ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the order bearing ref No.105570/532/G18/G141/2011 dated 02.12.2011 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently to direct the 1st and 2nd respondent to place the petitioner over and above respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in the seniority list as well as in the panel for the post of Chief Medical Officer.) 1. The petitioner calls in question the proceedings dated 02.12.2011 of the second respondent and after quashing the same seeks for a consequential direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to place her over and above respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in the seniority list as well as in the panel drawn for promotion to the post of Chief Medical Officer. 2. The petitioner joined as Medical Officer on contract basis on 17.07.1995 in the respondents Electricity Board. Subsequently, the service of the petitioner was regularised by an order d...
M. Moorthy Vs. The Commissioner, Chennai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-06-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned notification bearing Na.Ka.No.1790/2016 E2-1 dated 20.05.2016 issued by the 2nd and 3rd respondents and quash the same in so far as condition No.9 and 10 relating to the Item No.2 in Page No.8 of the tender notification.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. It is now brought to the notice of this Court on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 that the auction relating to the grant of license as regards coconut and fruit sale license and also the special condition Nos.9 and 10 were cancelled. In effect, the auction slated on 07.06.2016 is cancelled. 3. In view of the cancellation of auction to be slated on 07.06.2016, this Court concludes that nothing survives for adjudication in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs....
- ‹ Prev
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- Next ›
- Last »