Chennai Court July 2016 Judgments
M. Chitra and Others Vs. Selvakumar, The Joint Director, Madurai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempts Court Act,1971 to call upon the contemnor/respondent for wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.22731 of 2015 dated 17.12.2015.) T. Raja. J, 1. When the matter is taken-up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that the order under contempt has been complied with, which is not disputed by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners. 2. Since the order under contempt is complied with, this Contempt Petition stands closed....
Tag this Judgment!D. Susi Vs. The District Collector, Ramnad District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the Respondents 1 and 2 made in Na.Ka.W1/15681/2015 dated 28.05.2015 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents herein to place the petitioner as Mid Day Meal Organizer in Govt. Higher Secondary School Santhankulam in Ramanathapuram Panchayat Union.) T. Raja, J. 1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition to which he also circulated a letter to the Registry seeking withdrawal of this Writ Petition, apart from making an endorsement, in the bundle. 2. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Note: Issue order copy today. ...
Tag this Judgment!Janab Anis Mohammed Salin Vs. The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Corporatio ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the 1st Respondent at the instance of 4th Respondent from demolishing the super structure bearing Door Nos.144/1 144/G 144/H and 144/J at V.O.C.Street Tirunelveli Town Tirunelveli without giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the petitioner who is the tenant in the said premises and further direct the 2nd Respondent not to disconnect the service connection bearing 1) 07-006-212-206. 2) 07-006-212-213. 3) 07-006-212-208 and 4) 07-006-212-214 at door Nos.144/1, 144/G, 144/H and 144/J at V.O.C.Stree, Tirunelveli Town, Tirunelveli.) 1. When the matter is taken-up for hearing, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition and to approach the concerned Civil forum to get his grievance redressed. 2. Recording the said fact, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected mis...
Tag this Judgment!Palpandian Vs. Patric Josuva
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 09.04.2016 passed in I.A.No.583 of 2015 in O.S.No.37 of 2013 on the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamudram.) 1. This revision is directed against the order of the Sub Judge, Ambasamudram, passed in I.A.No.583 of 2015 in O.S.No.37 of 2013. 2. The respondent filed the suit in O.S.No.37 of 2013 before the Sub Court, Ambasamudrum against the petitioner for recovery of Rs.2,42,733/-, based on the promissory notes dated 27.06.2011. The suit is being contested by the petitioner/defendant by filing written statement. After commencement of trial and after marking of promissory notes as Ex.A1, the petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.583 of 2015 to eschew Ex.A.1 from the evidence by contending that it is not a promissory note in terms of section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned Sub Judge, Ambasamudram, dismissed the application observing that Ex....
Tag this Judgment!Manokaran Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police, Erode District and Ot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the 1st respondent herein to produce the body of the detenue, the petitioner's minor daughter by name Susendri aged about 17 years from the illegal custody of the 2nd and 3rd respondent before this Court and set her at liberty at once.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The petitioner is the father of one Susendri. According to the petitioner, her date of birth is 07.10.1998 and thus, she is still a minor. She was studying B.Sc. II year in the Navarasam Arts and Science College at Arachalur. According to the petitioner, she has been found missing from 05.07.2016 onwards. Since the respondent police did not trace out the girl, the petitioner has come up with this Habeas Corpus Petition. 2. Today, when this Habeas Corpus Petition was taken up for hearing, the petitioner did not make appearance. The learned counsel for the petitioner made appearance. The second respondent/ Mr.Devar...
Tag this Judgment!Paul Rabinson Kennedy Vs. Thamilarasan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in connection with STC.No.157 of 2016 on the file of the Hon'ble District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli, Cuddalore District and quash the same.) 1. This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in STC.No.157 of 2016 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Neyveli, Cuddalore District. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials placed on record. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as complainant and accused. It is the case of the complainant that the accused had borrowed Rs.1,50,000/- on 14.12.2015 and when the complainant demanded the same, the accused issued a cheque dated 11.01.2016 for Rs.1,50,000/-, which when presented by the complainant on 11.01.2016, was returned unpaid for insufficient funds. Thereafter, the complainant issued a Statutory Notice dated 12.01.2016 by registered post with ...
Tag this Judgment!Senba @ Senbaga Srikumar Vs. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Ka ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge at Puducherry in S.C.No.74 of 2012 dated 10.09.2015.) 1. The appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.74 of 2012 on the file of the learned III Additional Sessions Judge at Puducherry. There were four other accused who were arrayed as accused 2 to 5. The trial Court framed charges against all the five accused for offences punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C., Section 201 r/w 34 I.P.C. and Section 506(ii) r/w 34 I.P.C. By judgment dated 10.09.2015, the Trial Court convicted the accused 1 to 3 and 5 alone for offences under Section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The trial Court acquitted the accused 1 to 3 and 5 from all the other charges. The 4th accused is still absconding and the case has been split up for separ...
Tag this Judgment!K. Sornammal Vs. The District Collector, Collectorate Campus, Theni Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the learned Judge, Sub Court, Periyakulam to dispose of the execution petition in E.P.No.17 of 2012 in L.A.C.M.A.No.1 of 2009 on the file of the Sub Court, Periyakulam, within a time stipulated by this Court.) 1. This revision is filed seeking for a direction to the learned Sub Judge, Periyakulam, to dispose of the execution petition in E.P.No.17 of 2012 in L.A.C.M.A.No.1 of 2009 with in the stipulated time. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents acquired land of the petitioner in the year 1997 by issuing 4(1) Notification. The award of the Acquisition Officer has been enhanced in L.A.C.M.A.No.1 of 2009 by the Sub Court, Periyakulam on 20.01.2010. Based on the decree, the petitioner filed E.P.No.1 of 2012 for recovery of the award amount, however, for the past four years, the said E.P., is pending w...
Tag this Judgment!V. Natarajan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary, Ch ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayers: WP No. 31054 of 2013:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent made in Memorandum dated 25.09.2013 in Rc.No.6000/GS.II (1)/2013 for empanelling the candidates fit for appointment as Deputy Superintendent of Police (Cate.I) for the year 2012-2013 and quash the entry in respect of the petitioner in Serial No.61 in Annexure I to the Memorandum and consequently direct the respondents to pass necessary order in supplementing the reinstatement along with the benefits of grant of back wages, continuity of service and grant of probation and other all attendant benefits and to empanel the petitioner for the promotion in the next venue of promotion. WP No. 31055 of 2013:- Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the third respondent made in R.C.No.13/PR1(2)/CPO/2003 dated 21.03.2003 and quas...
Tag this Judgment!C. Selvamani Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Padmanabhapuram
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-29-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to expeditiously dispose of the Petitioner's appeal, dated 06.10.2015, within a reasonable time, as maybe fixed 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, his Appeal, dated 06.10.2015, is pending before the Respondent / Revenue Divisional Officer, Padmanabhapuram, Kanyakumari District, till date, without any disposal. It appears that summons was issued in connection with an enquiry, on 13.11.2015, till date, no enquiry was conducted inasmuch as one Gokuldoss had not produced the title deed. Thereafter, there was no summons was issued or enquiry conducted, as regards the pending Appeal. Hence, the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 5. Considering the fact that the Peti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »