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.
M. Arunachalam Vs. The General Manager, Madurai District Co-operative ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus thereby direct the 2nd respondent to disburse the money due under the cash certificate of the petitioner issued by the 2nd respondent with subsequent interest at 18% till the payment of entire amount.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents 1 and 2. 4. According to the petitioner, he had deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- on 21.02.2000 with the 2nd respondent Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank under 'Fixed Deposit Scheme'. The maturity date of the deposit was on 21.01.2016. In fact, the Bank had issued a Cash Certificate in favour of the petitioner mentioning the date of issue as '21.01.2000' and the date of maturity deposit of Rs.10,000/- as '21.01.2016'. It is to be noted that after a lapse of 16 years, on the date of maturity viz., 21.01.2016, the 2nd respondent Bank...
State of Tamil Nadu, rep. By its Secretary, Chennai and Another Vs. M/ ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayers: Writ appeal filed against the order dated 2.6.2015 passed by the learned single Judge made in M.P. No.2 of 2015 in W.P. No.15451 of 2015. W.P. No.34161 of 2014 filed for the issuance of a certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned Government Order in G.O. (2D) No.59, Labour and Employment (J1) Department dated 10.10.2014 and published in Part-II - Section 2 of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 3.12.2014 and quash the same.) Common Judgment Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J. 1. The present batch of petitions have been filed by the respective petitioners to quash the Government Order in G.O. (2D) No.59, Labour and Employment (J1) Department dated 10.10.2014 and published in Part-II - Section 2 of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 3.12.2014, whereby revision has been made to the minimum rates of wages for employment in respect of tailoring trade in export garments manufacturing industry, hosiery industry, etc. The writ appeal has been filed by the State agains...
Arunachalam Vs. State by The Inspector of Police, Tiruvarur
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed u/s.374 Cr.P.C., against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram, Tiruvarur, made in Spl.S.C.No.5 of 2014 dated 21.07.2015.) 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.5 of 2014 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Tiruvarur. He stood charged for offences under Sections 450, 376(2)(i) IPC and Section 6 read with 5(j)(ii) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 376(2)(n) of IPC, alternatively, under Section 6 read with 5(1) of POCSO Act, 2012 and 506(ii) of IPC. By judgment dated 21.07.2014, the trial court convicted the accused for offence under Section 6 read with 5(j)(ii) of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court...
Gopal @ Gopalakrishnan Vs. The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Erode, Erode District in Spl.S.C.No.1 of 2014 dated 07.03.2015.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in Spl.S.C.No.1 of 2014 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram (Fast Track Mahila Court, Erode. He stood charged for offences under Sections 370 and 506(ii) I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as POCSO Act) (later the said charge was altered into one under Section 6 of POCSO Act). By judgment dated 07.03.2015, the trial Court convicted him under all the charges and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three years for offence under Section 370 I.P.C.; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and pay a fi...
M/s. Sea Coral Clearing and Forwarding, Chennai Vs. The Commissioner o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayers in W.P.No.19312 of 2016: These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent connected with order in original No.47394/2016, dated 30.05.2016 in F.No.CHN/R-164/2011-CHA, ordering continuation of the suspension of the customs broker licence granted to her concern M/s.Sea Coral Clearing and Forwarding (PAN No.AKAPC2564R), in exercise of the power conferred on the said respondent under Regulation 19(2) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR for short), and to quash the same, holding the same to have been passed without jurisdiction and without following the due process of law as contemplated under the CBLR, 2013 and in gross violation to the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under the Constitution. W.P.No.19313 of 2016: These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the rec...
Sivaji and Another Vs. State Represented by The Inspector of Police, N ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment in S.C.No.20 of 2013 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam dated 16.09.2014.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are A.1 and A.2 in S.C.No.20 of 2013, on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam. A.1 stood charged for offences under Sections 294(b) and 302 I.P.C. A.2 stood charged for offences under Sections 294(b) and 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. By judgment dated 16.09.2015, the trial Court convicted and sentenced A.1 to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one week for offence under Section 294(b) I.P.C., and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years, for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. The trial Court convicted and sentenced A.2 to undergo simple imprisonment for two months a...
Masilamani Vs. The Inspector of Police, Ariyalur District
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal has been preferred to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed vide judgment dated 18.08.2015 made in S.C.No.8 of 2015 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Ariyalur, by allowing this appeal.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.8 of 2015 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Ariyalur. He stood charged for offences under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. By judgment dated 18.08.2015, the Trial Court convicted him under both charges and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 302 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 201 IPC. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in ...
P. Padmavathi Vs. M. Mahendran
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code against the Fair and final order dated 24.03.2015 in I.A.No.300 of 2014 in O.S.No.674 of 2003, on the file of First Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore.) 1. Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.300/2014 in O.S.No.674/2003 on the file of I Additional Sub Court, Coimbatore, the defendant filed the above civil revision petition. The plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.674/2003 for specific performance. 2. Before the trial court, the defendant appeared through her counsel and was contesting the case. Subsequently, she remained absent and an exparte decree was passed on 08.01.2008. Thereafter, the defendant filed an application in I.A.No.300/2014 to condone the delay of 2348 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree. 3. In the affidavit, filed in support of the petition, the defendant has stated that she came to know about the passing of exparte decree in the suit only o...
Padmanabha Dasa Uthradom Thirunal and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent, DRO, Tirunelveli, vide ROC.No.Z 2 91882/2008, dated 26.02.2010 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent Nos.3,6 and 7 to restore the name of Maharaja of Travancore in Sy.Nos.33/1,5,7,3,6,34/1,2,3,30/2,355/2,482/53, 190/5, 191/3, 192/2, 194/2, 196/2, 35/2, 3, 30/1A, 1B, 22/1, 2, 23/2A/1 in Courtalam Village, Senkottai Taluk, having an extent of 56.68 acres in the revenue records. Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representations dated 15.11.2014 and 17.09.2015 and further, direct him to rectify the error committed by the department in changing the name in the patta pertaining to S.Nos.33/1, 5,7,3,6,34/1,...
V. Bernandez Pandian Vs. The District Revenue Officer, Thanjavur Distr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-13-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the Revenue Divisional Officer, the 2nd respondent herein to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner in O.Mu.No.51981/2015 U2 dated 07.01.2016 on merits in accordance with law after considering all the documents available on records within a stipulated period.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. It comes to be known that as against the order dated 04.03.2011, passed by the 3rd respondent/Deputy Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Thanjavur, the petitioner had projected an appeal dated 15.12.2015 before the first respondent/District Revenue Officer, Thanjavur, who in turn transferred it to the 2nd respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, being the competent authority and as on date, the said appeal is pending. 5. Considering the limited relief sought for by th...
- ‹ Prev
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- Next ›
- Last »