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.
The Administrator, MKN Madarsha Trusts Adirampattinam, Vs. The Directo ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS to call for the records relating to O.Mu.No.6760/A2/2012 dated 30.01.2013 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to approve the appointment of S.Kadir Mohideen as Library Assistant in Kadhir Mohideen College, Adirampattinam, Thanjavur with effect from 01.11.2012 with all consequential monetary and other service benefits.) Common Order 1. Challenging either the rejection/return of proposals of the respective minority schools, seeking to approve the appointments made by them for the Non Teaching Posts as against the sanctioned vacancies or seeking a direction to the official respondents to grant approval for the appointments made by such minority schools, these writ petitions have been filed. Approval has been rejected on the ground that prior permission should be obtained before filling up any vacancy in a s...
R. Ramasamy Vandayar Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur Dis ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to defer the appeal filed in Na.Ka.No.3303 of 2010 till the disposal of the civil suit pending between the parties.) 1. The petitioner filed this Writ Petition to direct the first respondent to defer the hearing of the appeal till the disposal of the civil suit pending before the civil court. 2. When the matter was taken up for consideration, learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that the civil suit in O.S.No.135 of 2010 has already been decreed by the District Munsif, Pattukottai. 3. The prayer is essentially to call upon the first respondent to defer the hearing of Appeal till the disposal of the civil suit. Since the civil suit has already been disposed of by the District Munsif, Pattukottai, I am of the view that there is no question of directing the first respondent to keep the appeal pending. It is always open to...
S. Thangapandi and Others Vs. The Management of Tamil Nadu State Trans ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(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.1,81,580/- towards Leave salary together with 18% interest per annum along with interest amount towards the delayed payment of Gratuity amount Rs.4,51,569/- for the period from 01.04.13 to 25.05.2015 as per sec.7(3 A) of the payment of Gratuity Act and further directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to pay him interest amount towards the delayed payment of pension commutation amount Rs.2,45,806/- for the period from 01.04.13 to 30.10.13 at the rate of 18% interest within a time frame as may by 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 Division ...
B. Arul Ananda Ganesh and Another Vs. The Secretary to Government, Edu ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-23-2016
(Prayer in W.P(MD)No.15474 of 2016 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS to direct the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment of petitioner as Office Assistant at 4th respondent school and consequently disburse all the service and monetary benefits from 19.05.2016 in accordance with the provisions Tamil Nadu Private School Regulation Act and Rules. Prayer in W.P(MD)No.15477 of 2016 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS to direct the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment of petitioner as Junior Assistant at 4th respondent school and consequently disburse all the service and monetary benefits from 19.05.2016 in accordance with the provisions Tamil Nadu Private School Regulation Act and Rules. ) Common Order 1. These writ petition have been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to approve the appointment of p...
S. Shanmugam Vs. Dr. Snehalatha Elangovan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Prayer: Appeal suit filed under Section 96 and Order 41 Rule 1, CPC against the judgment and decree, dated 16-03-2016, passed in O.S.No.1074 of 2012 by the VII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.) A. Selvam, J. 1. This appeal suit has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 16-03-2016, passed in O.S.No.1074 of 2012 by the VII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The respondent herein, as plaintiff, has initiated O.S.No.1074 of 2012 on the file of the Trial Court praying to pass a money decree in respect of arrears of rent with future interest wherein the present appellant has been shown as sole defendant. 3. The material averments made in the plaint are that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property mentioned in the plaint and the same is situate in Old No.60, New No.80, 28th Cross Street, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai. The property mentioned in the plaint consists ground floor, first floor, second floor and third floor. The plaintiff has leased out ground f...
R. Selvi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by The Secretary to Government, ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, calling for the entire records in detention order passed in Cr.M.P.No.12/2016, dated 02.06.2016 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and set aside the same as illegal and direct the Respondents to produce the body or person of the petitioner's husband namely Raja, S/o.Dharman, Male aged about 46 years, who is detained in Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli before this Court and set him at liberty.) K.K. Sasidharan, J. 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the wife of the detenu Raja, who is under detention, pursuant to the order passed by the second respondent dated 02.06.2016, in Cr.M.P.No.12/2016, under Section 2(b) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug-offenders, Forest-offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982, (Tamil Nadu Act 14 ...
Megatrends Inc represented by its Mita Kalpesh Patel Vs. The Commissio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
S. Manikumar, J. 1. Writ appeal is directed against the order of the writ court, dated 11.02.2016 made in W.P.No.37072 of 2015 by which, the writ court, declined to interfere with the show cause notice, issued for enhancement of assessment made by the Commissioner of INcome Tax, Appeals-4, Chennai ITA No.85/2015-2016, for the Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. Facts leading to the appeal are that the appellant, claimed that it is a partnership firm, trading in stocks, shares, debentures, manufacturing, buying, selling and transporting of various consumer and industrial commodities. The appellant, filed its return for the Assessment year 2012-2013 on 29.09.2012, admitting, a total income of Rs.1,74,36,050/-. The return of income was processed, under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and selected for scrutiny. Details were called for, and after considering the same, explanation was given by the assessee. Assessment Order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was passed on...
S. Subramanian and Others Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukkot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to pass orders on its entirety of the Petitioners' representation, dated 28.06.2016, seeking house site patta, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main Writ Petitions itself are taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. According to the Petitioners, they do not have any own property in their names. In fact, the Petitioners are living in an ancestral house, which is in dilapidated condition. Also, it is represented that their brother Rajendran Chingaravelu, with their permission, had rebuilt their ancestral house, with his own funds, around the year 1996. 5. The main grievance of the Petitioners is that despite numerous representations, dated 17.03.2016, 06.06.2016 and 28.06.2016, addressed to the First Respondent / Revenue Divisional Officer...
The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Karungalpalayam Police Stat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Prayer:Appeal filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Erode in S.C.No.170 of 2009 dated 19.08.2010.) (Prayer:Petition filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Erode in S.C.No.170 of 2009 dated 19.08.2010. S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The respondent in Crl.A.No.735 of 2015 and the second respondent in Crl.R.C.No.1155 of 2010 is one and the same person, who is the sole accused in S.C.No.170 of 2009 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Erode. He stood charged for offences under Sections 449, 320 and 380 I.P.C. By judgment dated 19.08.2010, the trial Court acquitted him from all the charges. Aggrieved over the same, challenging the acquittal, the State has come up with Criminal Appeal in Cr...
J. Ilangovan Vs. The District Collector, Tuticorin District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-22-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd Respondent to register the 2nd Respondent order in Pa.Mu/1791 - 2004, dated 10.01.2007, based on the Petitioner's representation, dated 30.01.2016, within the stipulated period by this Court.) 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. According to the Petitioner, he is a daily wage worker and on 26.02.1990 one Kanakaraj executed a Sale Deed, in favour of his mother viz., Sudhanthiram Ammal, measuring an extent of 2 Acres 66 Cents of land in Survey No.654/1B, situated at Mullakadu Village, Tuticorin District, through Registered Sale Deed, bearing No.83/1993. After purchasing the property, all the revenue records changed in his mother's name and taxes paid in his mother's name. 5. The grievance of the Petitioner is that all of a sudden, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »