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.
Pon. Vembadian Vs. The Secretary to Government (Expenditure), Finance ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the order made in G.O.(2D)No.4, dated 13.01.2006, passed by the second respondent and the consequential order made in G.O.(2D)No.39, dated 23.04.2010 passed by the first respondent and quash the same. ) 1. This Writ Petition is directed against the non-speaking order passed by the first espondent dated 23 April, 2010, modifying the order passed by the second respondent dated 13 January, 2006, whereby and whereunder, punishment of stoppage of increment with cumulative effect for a period of four years was converted into one of stoppage of increment for a period of three years without cumulative effect. BACKGROUND: 2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Inspector in Local Fund Audit Department. Subsequently, he was promoted as Assistant Director. 3. The petitioner married a woman belonging to Most Backward Class ...
Meganathan Vs. State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Pallikonda Polic ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Vellore, in S.C.No.104 of 2009 dated 09.04.2005.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant in Crl.A.No.408 of 2015 is Accused No.1 and the appellant in Crl.A.No.244 of 2015 is Accused No.2 in S.C.No.104 of 2009 on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge,Vellore, Vellore District. He stood charged for offences under Sections 364 and 302 of IPC. The trial court, by judgement dated 09.04.2015, convicted A1 and A2 under both the charges and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months for offence under Section 364 of IPC and to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- each in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months for offence under Sectio...
M. Mohamed Hanifa, Proprietor, Nisha Enterprises Vs. Union of India, R ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 3 and 4 to send the samples of MILO products from the consignment ID-ICA20160500021167 bearing product code 19019010 and covered by Bill of Entry No.5177554 and to issue NOC for the same for local consumption based on the test results of the samples.) 1. Heard Mr.T.Saikrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Su.Srinivasan, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the first respondent and Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned standing counsel for the second respondent and Ms.H.Yasmeen Ali, learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4, and with their consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 3 and 4 to send the samples of MILO products from the consignment ID No.ICA20160500021167 bearing product Code No.19019010 and covered by the ...
Y. Kaleel Vs. The Secretary to the Government Department of Municipal ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(Prayer: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 05.07.2016 made in W.P.No.23079 of 2016.) 1. This appeal by the licensee/lessee is against the interim order of the learned single Judge dated 5.7.2016 made in W.P.No.23079 of 2016. The learned single Judge, by the impugned order with regard to the enhancement of the rental is concerned, has opined that since the appellant/writ petitioner is not agreeable for the enhanced amount, the respondents are at liberty to go ahead with the auction. However, the possession of the appellant shall not be disturbed without the permission of the Court and also made it clear that the order would cover only the persons who have approached the Court with a further direction to the third respondent-Mettupalayam Municipality to issue the notification of auction. 2. It appears that the appellant/writ petitioner has been in occupation of the Shop No.2, Bharathiyar Centenary Building situated in Mettupalayam Town Panchayat for ov...
M. Chellamuthu Vs. Sengalmalai Arulmigu Varadaraja Perumal and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair order dated 09.09.2015 made in I.A.No.683 of 2015 in O.S.No.312 of 2015 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Karur.) 1. Invoking the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this memorandum of civil revision has been filed by the first defendant in the suit challenging the order of the trial Court dated 09.09.2015 and made in I.A.No.683 of 2015 in O.S.No.312 of 2015 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Karur. 2. The first defendant in the suit O.S.No.312 of 2015 is the revision petitioner herein whereas the respondents 1 to 3 are the plaintiffs. The fourth respondent herein being the second defendant in the suit had passed away. The respondents 1 to 3 herein have filed the suit O.S.No.312 of 2015 as against the revision petitioner/first defendant as well as against the remaining defendants seeking the following reliefs: a) granting a de...
K. Gayathiri Vs. The Director of Collegiate Education, Chennai and Ano ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(PRAYER IN W.P.No.9637 of 2016: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records in Na.Ka. No. 28403/D/5/2015 pertaining to the transfer order dated 03.03.2016 issued by the Director of Collegiate Education, 1st respondent herein and quash the same and thereby direct the 1st respondent to reinstate the petitioner in Annamalai University and pass further orders. PRAYER IN W.P.No.17329 of 2016: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Registrar, Annamalai University, the respondent herein to pay the petitioner's salary and pass further orders.) 1. The Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the impugned orders passed by the Director of Collegiate Education in Na.Ka. No. 28403/D/5/2015 pertaining to the transfer order dated 03.03.2016 and for the consequential order of reinstatemen...
S. Venkatesan Vs. State rep by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ponneri in S.C.No.216 of 2011 dated 15.07.2013.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.216 of 2011 on the file of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ponneri. He stood charged for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. By judgment dated 15.07.2013, the trial Court convicted him under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: 2.1. The appellant is the husband of the deceased Mrs.Devi. P.W.2 is the male child of the deceased and the accused. All these three were residing together in their house at Mariamman Koil Street, Nall...
M/s. Dhanalakshmi Mills Ltd., Tirupur, Vs. R. Krishnamurthy and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(Prayer: Appeal suit filed under Section 96 Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure r/w Order 41 Rule 1 of CPC against the judgment and decree, dated 30.6.2014, passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupur in O.S.No.881 of 2008.) A. Selvam, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal suit is to the Judgment and Decree dated 30.6.2014, passed in O.S.No.881 of 2008, by the II Additional District Court, Tirupur 2. The first respondent herein, as plaintiff, has instituted O.S.No.881 of 2008 on the file of the trial court, praying to direct the defendants to execute a Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiff in pursuance of sale agreement dated 10.1.2004, wherein the present appellant and the remaining respondents have been shown as defendants. 3. The material averments made in the plaint are that the suit property is the absolute property of the first defendant. The plaintiff is doing real estate business. The company of the first defendant has become sick and has been referred to the ...
Mohan Vs. State by the Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-21-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed u/s.374 Cr.P.C., against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur, made in S.C.No.48 of 2013 dated 22.08.2013.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.48 of 2013 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur. Originally, there was yet another accused by name Rahmath Nisha. The case against Mrs.Rahmath Nisha was split up and tried separately. So far as the present Sessions Case is concerned, the appellant/accused alone was tried for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. By judgment dated 22.08.2013, the trial court convicted him under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: (a) Th...
Saradhamani and Another Vs. Sankar and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2016
(Prayer: C.R.P.(NPD).No.4255 of 2009 filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the fair and decreetal order dated 14.09.2009 made in I.A.No.1259 of 2008 in O.S.No.15 of 2003 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Mettur. C.R.P.(NPD).No.4256 of 2009 filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the fair and decreetal order dated 14.09.2009 made in I.A.No.1257 of 2008 in O.S.No.189 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Mettur.) 1. Since the trial Court had dismissed the applications in I.A.No.1257 of 2008 in O.S.No.189 of 2002 and I.A.No.1259 of 2008 in O.S.No.15 of 2003 by a common order, both the Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of by this common order. 2. C.R.P.(NPD).No.4255 of 2009 arises against the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.1259 of 2008 in O.S.No.15 of 2003 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Mettur. The defendants are the petitioners and the respondent was the plaintiff. 3. C.R.P.(NPD).No.4256 of 2009 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »