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.
Velu @ Velayudham Vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Salem
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem, in S.C.No.200 of 2011 dated 28.01.2012.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.200 of 2011 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem. He stood charged for offences under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC. By judgement dated 28.11.2012, the trial court convicted him under Sections 302 of IPC for murder of the deceased and instead of offence under Section 307 of IPC for attempt to murder of P.W.2, the trial court convicted the accused for offence under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 302 of IPC [no default sentence was imposed]; and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for offence under Section 324 of IPC. Challenging the above said conviction and sentences, the sole ac...
Balakrishnan Vs. The Superintendent of Police and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the respondent No.2 to register the case on the petitioner's complaint dated 01.04.2016 and proceed with the same as per law within the time frame fixed by this Court.) 1. This petition has been filed for a direction to the respondent No.2 to register the case on the petitioner's complaint dated 01.04.2016 and proceed with the same as per law. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he borrowed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from Adilingaperumal on 15.10.2013 by executing a mortgage deed in favour of the accused; that even though the recital in the mortgage deed stipulates payments of interest, the proposed accused was demanding exorbitant interest; that it made the petitioner to pledge his jewels and to borrow money to pay that exorbitant interest; that the proposed accused cheated the petitioner and go...
M.S. Rajasekaran Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal dated 04.04.2016 to refund the deposited amount of Rs.6, 25, 894/- to the petitioner.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the petitioner, he is the Proprietor of Palanikumar Transports, Pattukottai and in the year 1990, he was appointed as a Transport Contractor by the 2nd respondent/Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Thanjavur Region through open tender. Since then, the transport contract is being extended periodically. 4. During the course of business, the 2nd respondent/Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Thanjavur Region, directed the petitioner to transport 550 bags of rice from Ammanpettai Modern Rice Mill to Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Thiruvall...
N. Saminathan Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Declaration, declaring the notification dated 12.01.2016 issued by the third respondent inviting application for direct recruitment to the vacancies of Junior Training Officer posts in Government Industrial Training Institutes of Tamil Nadu in the Training Wing of the second respondent for the year 2014-2015 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law in so far as not indicating the date of the Preliminary Test (Screening Test) and also the Main Selection as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents to issue fresh notification direct recruitment to the vacancies of Junior Training Officer posts in Government Industrial Training Institutes of Tamil Nadu in the Training Wing of the second respondent for the year 2014-2015 for indicating the date of the Preliminary Selection (Screening Exam) and by issuing the Hall Ticket to the petitioner a...
Minor. Vikneshkumar and Others Vs. Karthik
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying against the Order made in I.A.No.87 of 2012 in O.S.No.113 of 2009, on the file of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore, dated 23.11.2012.) 1. Heard the submissions of Mr.K.A.Ravindran, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revision Petitioners and Mr.C.Prakasam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent. The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore, made in I.A.No.87 of 2012, in O.S.No.113 of 2009, dated 23.11.2012, whereby the Trial Court has dismissed the condone delay petition seeking setting aside of the Ex-parte decree. 2. O.S.No.113 of 2009 was filed seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 25.09.2006. It is the case of the Petitioners that they are the Defendants in the Suit and the agreement dated 25.09.2006 was executed as security for the loan advanced to the ...
S. Manikaraj Vs. State,by Inspector of Police, Varapalayam Police Stat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
V. Bharathidasan, J. 1. The sole accused in S.C.No.9 of 2012 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Gobichettipalayam (Fast Track Court No.2) is the appellant in this appeal. He stood charged for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the Trial Court convicted the appellant for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and also imposed a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. Challenging that conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: (a) The deceased was the wife of the appellant/accused. Both of them were residing at door No.1/223, Indira Nagar, Malaipalayam Village and suspecting the fidelity of the deceased, with premeditated intention to murder the deceased , on 11.4.2011, at about 3.30 pm, the accused poured kerosene on the deceased and set fire on h...
Kasi Raja and Another Vs. Siva Sakthikala
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order dated 04.04.2016 made in Crl.M.P.No.1317 of 2015 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate, (Fast Track Court), Tuticorin.) 1. This revision arises out of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court, Tuticorin, condoning the delay of 20 days caused in preferring the private complaint for an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. This revision is at the instance of the accused. 3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that no sufficient reason has been adduced. And nothing to substantiate the allegation that the notice issued by the previous lawyer has been misplaced. In the circumstances, the discretion exercised by the Court below is not in accordance with law. 4. I have anxiously considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the impugned order and the materials ...
George Qubert Raj Vs. The Superintendent of Police, At Nagercoil, Kany ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint of the petitioner dated 16.04.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed for a direction to the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint of the petitioner dated 16.04.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondents. 3. The sum and substance of the complaint preferred by the petitioner is that he is an eye witness to the occurrence, in which, his mother and his uncle were murdered by the accused persons, pursuant to which, a case has been registered in Crime No.595/2013. While so, the proposed accused persons are threatening the petitioner not to give any evidence against him. 4. According to the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), petition enquiry is stated to be pending before the 2nd respondent. 5. In view of the above submission, the 2nd respondent is directed ...
A. Thanikachalam and Others Vs. The Union of India owning Southern Rai ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Prayer: Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeals under Section 23(1) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 read with Section 16 of Railways Act, 1989, against the orders dated 10.09.2008 and 29.4.2008 made in O.A.Nos.51 and 121 of 2006 respectively on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench.) 1. C.M.A.No.3508 of 2008 has been filed by the parents of the deceased-T.Jagan and C.M.A.No.2787 of 2008 has been filed by the wife and two minor children of the deceased-Ekambaram, assailing the impugned orders dated 10.09.2008 and 29.4.2008 passed in O.A.Nos.51 and 121 of 2006 respectively by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench, whereby the claim of the appellants for payment of compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- each with interest at 12% per annum from the date of incident till the date of payment, for the death of T.Jagan and Ekambaram respectively due to the accidental fall from the moving trains on the respective dates was rejected by the Tribunal. 2. The fac...
K.S. Krishnamurthy Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Dindigul ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-03-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records pertaining to Crime No.3 of 2015 dated 20.03.2015 on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned.) 1. The petitioner/Krishnamurthy/A1 came forward under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR in Crime No.3 of 2015 registered by the first respondent/Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-corruption, Dindigul. Selection of Assistant-cum-Typist on a consolidated pay, was conducted, to the Juvenile Justice Board, Dindigul and Child Welfare Committee, Dindigul, which comes under Social Welfare Department. A list of candidates was called for from the District Employment Office. Two lists, each consisting of 10 persons were prepared. Typing test was conducted and it was monitored by A2. The petitioner/A1 was the then Superintendent of the Regional Social Defence Office, Madurai and his duty is to collect and put up the papers of all the p...
- ‹ Prev
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- Next ›
- Last »