Chennai Court July 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.
A. Devarajan Vs. State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Salem District
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal has been preferred to set aside the conviction and sentence passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Special Judge for EC Act case), Salem, by judgment dated 17.04.2006 made in S.C.No.310 of 2004.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.310 of 2004 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Special Court under the Essential Commodities Act) Salem. There were three other accused by name Maveeran @ Venkatachalam, Sundaram and Kannan @ Chinnakannu, who were arrayed as Accused 2 to 4. All the four accused stood charged for offence under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC. In addition, the first accused was charged for offence under Section 3 r/w 25(1-B) (a) of the Indian Arms Act, 1959 and Section 307 IPC. The 4th accused stood charged for offence under Section 5 r/w 25(1)(a) of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. By judgment dated 17.04.2006, the Trial Court acquitted the 4th accused from the said charge, however, con...
B. Sankar Vs. The State represented by Inspector of Police S-9, Pazhav ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed u/s.374 (2) Cr.P.C., against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpet, in S.C.No.36 of 2013 on 11.03.2016.) Judgment: V. Bharathidasan, J. 1. The sole accused in S.C.No.36 of 2013 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpet, is the appellant herein. He stood charged for an offence under Section 302 IPC. The trial Court convicted him for the above offence and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment. Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The prosecution case in brief is as follows:- (i) The deceased in this case one Balakrishnan is the father of the accused. The accused is a drunkard and frequently demanding money from the deceased. When the deceased refused to give money on 03.09.2012 at about 1.15 p.m, the accused attacked the deceased with Scissors indiscriminately and caused his death. (ii) ...
Valarmathi and Others Vs. Anandan and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code against the decree and order of the Lower Appellate Court dated 27.03.2015 made in I.A.No.540 of 2013 in A.S.S.R.No.2991 of 2013 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Chengalpattu.) 1. Challenging the judgment and decree passed in I.A.No.540 of 2013 in A.S.S.R.No.2991 of 2013 on the file of the Principal District Court, Kancheepuram at Chengalpattu, the legal representatives of the 4th defendant, Seppan in O.S.No.3 of 1996 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, Chengalpattu have filed the above Civil Revision Petition. 2. The respondents are the plaintiffs 3 and 4. The plaintiffs 1 and 2 had died after the passing of preliminary decree and their legal representatives were brought on record in the final decree proceedings in I.A.No.538 of 2004. Though they were impleaded in the final decree application, the petitioners have not made them as parties in the Civil Revision Petition. 3. Since the de...
P. Muthukumaran Vs. The Director, Department of Employment and Trainin ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the fourth respondent from preventing the Petitioner to write the examinations in any manner in the Government Industrial Training Institution, K.Pudur, Madurai- 625 007 by citing the pendency of the Criminal Case in Crime No.1906 of 2016 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Anna Nagar Police Station, Madurai City.) 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, after completion of 12th standard, he had joined ITI Fitter Course in Government Industrial Training Institute(ITI) at K.Pudur, Madurai. He is now studying in second year Fitter Course and now, it is final semester(IVth Semester) of his studies. He is not having any arrears subjects to his credit for the past three semesters. 4. The stand of the Petitioner is that on 28.6.2016 at K.Pudur Road, som...
D. Gandhimathi Vs. The District Registrar, District Registration Offic ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to conduct an enquiry based on the petitioner's representation, dated 29.04.2016 to act upon the Circular No.67, dated 03.11.2011 issued by Inspector General of Registration, in accordance with law within the time to be stipulated by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final hearing. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. According to the Petitioner, she is the owner of the property in R.S.No.161/9, measuring an extent of 59 cents in R.S.No.160/9, in an extent of 26 cents and Re.S.No.160/4, measuring an extent of 33 cents in Sithalangudi Village, T.Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District. As a matter of fact, the said properties were purchased by her in the year 1990, by means of registered Sale Deeds, bearing Nos.1745 of 1990 and 1336 of 1996. Based on the said reg...
Kaliammal Vs. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District and Anothe ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd Respondent to include the name of legal heirs in patta No.1930 in respect of property at Virudhunagar District, Sivakasi Taluk, Eenjar Village, Ayan Punjai in Survey No.1166/2A to a total extent of 2.52.50 hectares, by considering Petitioner's representation, dated 17.06.2016.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final hearing. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. According to the Petitioner, her father Veerapa S/o.Veeru possessed the property at Eenjar Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District in Survey No.1166/2A, measuring an extent of 2.52.5 Hectares. Her father was in absolute possession and enjoyment of the subject property. As a matter of fact, her father expired on 10.11.1962 and her mother V.Krishnammal also expired in the year 1960. She along with one Eswarathevar, E...
G. Senthil Kumar and Others Vs. Helikx HR Training and Business Consul ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the inaction of the II Additional District Court, Salem in disposing of I.A.No.66 of 2016 in O.S.No.48 of 2016, on the file of the II Additional District Court, Salem.) 1. Petitioner seeks a direction to learned II Additional District Judge, Salem, to dispose of I.A.No.66 of 2016 in O.S.No.48 of 2016, within a stipulated time. 2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that alleging infringement of trademark, the petitioners/plaintiffs have moved O.S.No.48 of 2016 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Salem, seeking permanent injunction. Petitioners/Plaintiffs moved in I.A.No.66 of 2016 seeking temporary injunction. Though notice was ordered on 19.02.2016, the application was adjourned as many as on 14 occasions for counter and till, date, the application has not been disposed of. 4. Considering the submissions made, this Court directs the II...
M. Sankaranarayanan Vs. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: WP No. 34917 of 2015:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the second respondent herein in his proceedings D-2015/2016/Cancellation of appointment of Deputy Director post on Deputation dated 27.08.2015 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to allow the petitioner to work as Deputy Director as per the appointment order issued in D-/2015-2016/Recruitment for the post of Deputy Director on Deputation dated 05.08.2015, within time-frame as deemed fit and proper by this Court.) Common Order 1. The petitioner in both the writ petitions are one and the same. The issue involved in these writ petitions are inter-connected. Therefore, both the writ petitions are taken up together for final disposal and are disposed of by this common order. 2. In the first writ petition namely WP No. 34917 of 2015, the challenge is to the ord...
John @ John Brito Vs. State by Inspector of Police R-11, Rayala Nagar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed u/s.374 (2) Cr.P.C., against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Poonamallee, in S.C.No.107 of 2014 on 04.09.2015.) V. Bharathidasan, J. 1. The sole accused in S.C.No.107 of 2014 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge,, Poonamallee, is the appellant herein. He stood charged for an offence under Section 302 IPC. The trial Court convicted him for the above said charge and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo 12 months rigorous imprisonment. Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the present Appeal has been filed. 2. The prosecution case in brief, is as follows:- (i) The deceased in this case one Thennarasu was running a hotel in the name and style of 'Barani Mess' at Ramapuram, Chennai. The accused was working as a supplier in the above hotel. Since the accused was irregular in attending duty, ...
M/s. Binny Limited Vs. The Commissioner of Customs (Imports) Customs H ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-27-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 04.03.2015 made in W.P.No.15103 of 2014 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court.) 1. Being aggrieved over the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, the writ petitioner has filed the present Writ Appeal. 2. The facts leading to filing of this Writ Appeal are as follows: 2.1 The Appellant Company, during the course of its business, imported textile machineries along with auxiliary equipments and spares consisting of 200 containers during the year 1996 from Germany. At that point of time, the Company was in great financial crunch and the machinery imported was also not immediately required for production. Hence, taking into consideration of both the factors, the Appellant Company decided to bond the imported goods as per the provisions of Customs Act, 1962, in Customs Bonded Warehouse without payment of duty pending clearance. 2. 2 As the Appellant Company was put to several...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »