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.
G. Pushpa Rani Vs. The Executive Officer, Selection Grade Town Panchay ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the Respondent in a.d.m.k.ma.No.115/2015-16, dated 5.10.2015 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondent to grant plan approval and order of licence to construct the building in the Petitioner's property bearing S.No.276/2B and 283/1 measuring a total extent of 1058.11 sq.ft in Mission School Street, Ward No.15, Kalakkadu, Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Tirunelveli District.) 1. Mr.M.Maharaja, learned counsel on record for the Petitioner has circulated a letter, dated 29.06.2016 to the Registry, seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition. The said letter is placed on record. 2. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs....
M/s. Rockwell Automation India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s. ETA Engineering Pvt. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 11 (5) of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an Arbitrator(s) to decide the disputes and differences between the parties in terms of the Contract Agreement dated 24.05.2012/28.09.2013 and Contract No.UAA No.06.) 1. The Chennai Metro Rail Ltd., in its Phase-I of the Chennai Metro Rail Project, invited bidders for carrying on Design, Manufacture, Verification, Delivery, Installation, Testing, Commissioning etc., qua the Integrated Tunnel Ventilation System. The respondent herein was selected as a pre qualified bidder and was ultimately selected as successful bidder by award of the contract with the authority to assign, delegate the contract work to sub-contractors subject to the approval of the Chennai Metro Rail Limited. In furtherance of the project of sub-contracting of the work, the respondent obtained quotations from the petitioner, who is stated to have completed the work in respect of Dubai Metro and Delhi Air...
Venkatesan and Others Vs. State, by Inspector of Police, Villupuram Di ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to set-aside the conviction imposed in the judgment, dated 30.10.2014, made in S.C.No.79 of 2011 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Villupuram, by allowing this Criminal Appeal.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants are the accused 1 to 4 in S.C.No.79 of 2011 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Villupuram. There were three other accused, accused 5 to 7, in the case. The trial court framed as many as five charges against the accused as follows:- ChargesAccusedSection of lawCharge No.1Accused 1 to 7148 I.P.C.,Charge No.2Accused 1302 I.P.C.,Charge No.3Accused 2 and 4324 I.P.C.,Charge No.4Accused 5 to 7506 (ii) I.P.C.,Charge No.5Accused 2 and 7302 r/w 149 I.P.C.,2. By judgment, dated 30.10.2014, the trial Court acquitted the accused 5 to 7, but convicted the appellants / accused 1 to 4 as detailed below:- AccusedSection of lawSentenceA-1U/s 148To undergo Rigorous Imprisonmen...
Muniyandi Vs. The Inspector of Police, Siva Kanchi Police Station, Kan ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Appeal against the judgment, dated 13.02.2015, made in S.C.No.62 of 2011 on the file of Sessions Court-II, Kancheepuram.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.63 of 2011 on the file of learned Sessions Court No.II, Kancheepuram. He stood charged for the offences under Sections 302 and 380 IPC. By judgment, dated 13.02.2015, the trial Court convicted him for both the charges and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and pay fine of Rs.1,000/-; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 380 IPC and to undergo life imprisonment and pay fine of Rs.2,000/-; in default, to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows : 2.1. The deceased in this case was one Mr.Balasubramaniam. He was working as a Watchman in a s...
S. Anitha Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District and A ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the 2nd respondent to file the final report in Crime No.51 of 2016 dated 02.03.2016 on the file of the 2nd respondent within the time stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to file a final report in Crime No.51 of 2016 dated 02.03.2016 on the file of the 2nd respondent. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents, who would submit that the investigation would be completed and final report would be filed within a period of six months. 3. In view of the above submission, the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent police to complete the investigation in Crime No.51 of 2016 and to file a final report before the concerned jurisdictional Court within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this ord...
M/s. Gokaldas Exports Limited, Chennai Vs. The Presiding Officer, Empl ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to entertain the petitioner's appeal challenging the order of the 2nd respondent dated 16.11.2015 in respect of determination of EDLI contribution of Rs.13,17,517/- and consequently forbearing the 2nd respondent from claiming interest and damages pursuant to show cause notice dated 15.06.2016 in respect of EDLI contribution of Rs.13,17,517/- till the disposal of the appeal.) 1. The petitioner is a company covered under the provisions of EPF and MP Act and for claiming exemption for EDLI contribution, it took LIC premium towards EDLI contribution. In respect of conveyance allowance, the petitioner denied its liability. By order dated 16.11.2015, the second respondent directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.23,23,222/- towards EDLI contribution and conveyance allowance. The petitioner, by letter dated 10.12.2015 forwarded cheque for a sum o...
Savithiri Vs. The Assistant Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, Tamil ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order dated 11.04.2016 passed in W.P.(MD) No.18943 of 2015 by allowing the Writ Appeal.) S.S. Sundar, J. 1. This Writ Appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.18943 of 2015 as against the order passed by the learned Single Judge closing the writ petition by order dated 11.04.2016. 2.The writ petitioner filed the Writ Petition above mentioned, for issuing a writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent herein, the Assistant Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, TANGEDCO, to give electricity service connection to the appellant with regard to Door No.1/8-1, Plot No.4, in Krishnanagar, Cholanmaligai, in Survey No.145/4B, Kumbakonam Taluk, Thanjavur District. The writ petitioner claimed to have purchased the plot measuring to an extent of 1800 square feet in the lay out known as Krishnanagar in Cholanmaligai Village, and got patta changed in her name. According to the petitioner, she has constructed a ...
M. Moorthy Vs. The District Collector, Dindigul District and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 6.4.2016 within the period stipulated by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2.By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3.No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4.The grievance of the Petitioner is that he had addressed a communication, dated 6.4.2016 to the Second Respondent/The Tahsildar, Kodaikanal Taluk, Dindigul District, praying for issuance of patta in respect of S.F.No.36/1 of Kodaikanal Village, measuring an extent of 0.76 cents. 5.It comes to be known that the Petitioner, on numerous occasions, had submitted Petitions praying for issuance of patta and it all proved futile. Hence, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 6.Considering the fact that the Petitioner's representation, dated 6.4.2016 is pending before the Sec...
N. Ponnappan Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Customs Tuticorin Customs ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st Respondent to restrain the delivery of 18 containers of raw cashew to any other 3rd party based on any illegal amended bill of lading other than the Petitioner and consequently order to deliver the cargo which are kept in 2nd Respondent warehouse in bill of lading numbers 1. COSU6095467990-14.4.2016-4 Containers - 64.500MT - 860 bags 2.COSU6095468160-14.4.2016-8 Containers - 129.375MT - 1725 bags 3. COSU6095468170-14.4.2016-3 Containers - 48.000MT - 640 bags 4. COSU6095468180 -14.4.2016-3 Containers - 48.375MT - 645 bags TOTAL 18 Containers - 290.250 MT - 3870 bags to the Petitioner only according to law based on his representation dated 08.05.2016.) Order: 1. The Petitioner has focused the instant writ petition before this Court praying for passing of an order by this Court in directing the First Respondent to restrain the delivery of 18 containers of 'Raw Cas...
Marie Wilson, Managing Trustee Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, represented by ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-01-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to call for the records and quash the case in P.R.C. No.4/2014 on the file of the District Munsif -cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Sriperumbudur, as against the petitioner.) 1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records and quash the case in P.R.C. No.4/2014 on the file of the District Munsif -cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Sriperumbudur, as against the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is the Managing Trustee of Jeppiaar Remibai Educational Trust, which runs an Engineering College in the name of Jeppiaar Institute of Technology. On the instructions of the petitioner, a basketball indoor auditorium was being constructed in the Engineering College in the year 2012. In addition to the construction of the said auditorium, the petitioner had instructed the contractors to build an arch. When the arch was being constructed, it collapsed resulting in the death of 10 labourers and grievous injuries to 2...
- ‹ Prev
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 65
- 66
- Next ›
- Last »