Chennai Court August 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. Periyakaruppan Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transpor ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's monetary benefits which are due to him after retirement within the time as stipulated by this Court.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondents Transport Corporation. Seeking his retirement benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the issue is covered by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, dated 12.06.2015. He has further submitted that the respondents would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Honourable Division Bench. 3. For ready reference, the judgment, dated 12.06.2015, passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, is extracted hereunder: "The learned Additional Advo...
Annaduurai and Another Vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Mech ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
Common Judgement S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant in Crl.A.No.198 of 2016 is Accused No.1 and the appellant in Crl.A.No.619 of 2016 is Accused No.2 in S.C.No.262 of 2007 on the file of the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Salem. They stood charged for offences under Section 450 of IPC and under Section 396 of IPC [Two counts]. The trial court, by judgement dated 18.02.2016, convicted both A1 and A2 under Sections 450 and 396 of IPC and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of six months for offence under Section 450 of IPC; and to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2,000/- each for each count in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of six months for offence under Section 396 of IPC [Two counts]. Challenging the above said conviction and sentences, A1 has come up with Crl.A.No.198 of 2016 while A2 has come up with Crl.A.No.619 of 2016. 2. The case of th...
M/s. W.S. Industries (India) Ltd Vs. The District Revenue Officer Offi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the order of the 1st Respondent dated 28.12.2015 in proceeding R.C.No. 25496/2015/B.3 and quash the same.) 1. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner / Company, aggrieved by the impugned proceedings/order of the 1st respondent dated 28.12.2015, in and by which, the mistake committed during Updating Registry [UDR] Scheme in respect of the lands in Survey Nos.73/2, admeasuring to an extent of 0.92.0 Hectares, lands in Survey No.77, admeasuring to an extent of 2.30.0 Hectares came to be rectified and cancelling the sub-division of the lands in Survey Nos.70/1A and 70/1B and ordering sub-division of the land in Survey No.70 as S.No.70/1, admeasuring to an extent of 2.30.5 Hectares, situate at Porur Village, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District, with a further direction to register the same in the name of the ...
Jeyaseelan Vs. The Inspector General of Registration, Chennai and Othe ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.C.Pa.No.15/2011, dated 26.04.2013 received on 09.05.13 with regard to document No.1590 of 2010 of the petitioner and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal sent by way of registered post on 21.12.2011, on merits in accordance with law.) 1. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Additional Government Pleader for the Respondents. 2. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing. 3. According to the Petitioner, he had presented a sale deed, dated 20.09.2010, before the Third Respondent/Sub Registrar, Nazareth, Tiruchendur Taluk, Tuticorin District, to register the same after receiving necessary charges payable by him. As a matter of fact, the Third Respondent had directed him to pay a sum of Rs.70,668/- a...
V. Chellamuthu and Others Vs. The Superintendent Engineer, Tamil Nadu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayers in all W.Ps.: Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records of the order in Ka.No.UMIPO/Eand PE/Neelaambur/CO Pudhiya Minenaipu/A.No.052, 053, 055 and 054/2016, respectively, dated 29.03.2016, on the file of the second respondent herein, and to quash the same, and consequently, to direct the second respondent to provide electricity service connection to the petitioners' residential houses at S.F.No.789/4, bearing Door No.1/490-Y,V, Y-1 and X, at Kallukuthu Neelambur Village in Sulur Taluk of Coimbatore District.) Common Order 1. Heard Mr.N.Ponraj, the learned counsel appearing for petitioners, and Mr.S.K.Rameshuwar, learned Standing Counsel (for TNEB), appearing for first and second respondents, and Mr.A.Thiagarajan, the learned counsel appearing for third and fourth respondents. 2. These Writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners, praying for issuance of a Wr...
G. Kutha Baksh Vs. The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Tallakulam, ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS restraining the respondents not to seize attach the movable properties of the petitioner on the basis of the impugned provisional demand notices dated 13.07.2016 in assessment No.389953 and 389954 pending enquiry under Rule 28 Sch.II of the Madurai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1921.) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed....
V.S. Krishna and Another Vs. The Secretary to Government, Housing and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the entire records relating to the impugned order in Letter No.7160/UD-VII(2)/2016-3, dated 5.5.2016, passed by the first respondent and quash the same.) M.V. Muralidaran, J. 1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Certiorari to call for the entire records relating to the impugned order in Letter No.7160/UD-VII(2)/2016-3, dated 5.5.2016, passed by the first respondent and quash the same. 2. The facts in a nutshell are as under: The writ petitioners are represented by their Power of Attorney. The petitioners claim to be the owners of the entire land situate in Plot No.27 in Survey No.2/1B3A Part 1 (New Survey No.2/40), East Coast Road, Panaiyur, Shollinganallur, Chennai - 600 119 and they are in possession and enjoyment of the land. 3. It is alleged that even though by judgment and decree dated 31.10.2011 passed in O.S.No.89 of 2014 by the Additional District Mu...
R. Kanagamani Vs. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to settle the Petitioners retirement benefits Provident Fund Gratuity Commutation of Pension Leave Wages for 240 days Medical Leave Wages for 9.5 days, Surrender Leave Wages, and Dearness Allowance, payable to him along with monthly pension with reasonable rate of interest.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondents Transport Corporation. Seeking his retirement benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the issue is covered by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, dated 12.06.2015. He has further submitted that the respondents would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Honourable Division Bench. 3. For ready reference, the judgment...
V. Bakthavachalam Vs. The Management of Tamil Nadu State Transport Tri ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to pay the petitioner Rs.7,00,868/- towards Gratuity, Rs.6,10,531/ towards Leave Salary and Rs.1,38,582/- towards encashment of Leave On Personal Affairs together with 18% interest per annum along with interest amount towards the delay in paying EPF Employees Contribution amount Rs.2,94,198/- for the period from 31.10.15 to 22.06.16 at the rate as per EPF Scheme and further directing the respondents to pay him Rs.2,87,996/- towards the Pension Commutation, together with 18% interest per annum, within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondents Transport Corporation. Seeking his retirement benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the issue is covered by a judgment of a Di...
O. Jeevan Prakash Vs. The District Registrar (Document Registration), ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(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 register the Petitioner's document, dated 14.07.2016 kept as a pending in document No.P201600016 and release the same in compliance with the Registration Act, 1908.) 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. The main grievance of the Petitioner is that he had applied with all requisite legal formalities like purchasing of stamp papers and payment of stamp duty etc. As a matter of fact, he had requested the Second Respondent / Sub Registrar (Document Registration) Peravurani, Thanjavur District, to register the Sale Deed and release the same. However, the Second Respondent, without any authority, is not registering the document, after accepting the registration fees. (paid through Challan, dated 14.07.2016) and keeping the...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »