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.
A. Annapporani Vs. A. Mani and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer: Original Side Appeal preferred under Order 36 Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules, read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the judgment and decree dated 24.2.2006 in C.S.No.1388 of 1993, passed by the learned single Judge. Cross Objection filed against the judgment and decree dated 24.02.2006, passed in C.S.No.1388 of 1993.) Common Judgment: A. Selvam, J. 1. The present case is a text book example of, as to how an internecine battle is being fought, for over a period of two decades, by Siblings in respect of a flimsy dispute. 2. These Original Side Appeal No.295 of 2006 and Cross-Objection No.132 of 2010 are directed against the judgment and decree, dated 24.2.2006, passed in C.S.No.1388 of 1993, by the learned single Judge of this Court. 3. The appellant in O.S.A.No.295 of 2006, as plaintiff, has instituted C.S.No.1388 of 1993, on the file of this Court, praying to pass a preliminary decree of partition, wherein, the respondents shown in O.S.A.No.295 of 2006, have bee...
Major K. Mathews Vs. K.R. Vittal Raman and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., against the judgment dated 16.03.2001 in C.C.No.8338 of 1992 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.) This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgment of acquittal, dated 16.03.2001 passed in C.C.No.8338 of 1992 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, whereby, in respect of the private complaint filed by the appellant herein in the said C.C.No.8338 of 1992 as against the respondents herein, the respondents were acquitted of the charges. 2. The case of the appellant/complainant is as follows: (a) On 02.09.1992 at about 11.30 hours, he was informed over his residential telephone by his nephew (elder brother's youngest son-K.O.George, who was a permanent Central Government employee at Carriage Works, Southern Railway, Perambur and residing at No.1, United India Nagar, 3rd Main Street, Ayanavaram), that he was assaulted jointly by three persons, of whic...
Baby and Another Vs. Sellammal and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure Code against the order dated 30.08.2010 made in I.A.No.151 of 2009 in A.S.No.73 of 2009 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Ariyalur.) 1. Civil Revision Petition filed against the order dated 30.08.2010 made in I.A.No.151 of 2009 in A.S.No.73 of 2009 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Ariyalur. 2. A suit in O.S.No.107 of 2007 was filed by the petitioners/ plaintiffs against the respondents for permanent injunction and the same was decreed on 28.08.2009, against which, the respondents have filed an appeal suit in A.S.No.73 of 2009 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Ariyalur along with which, the respondents also filed application in I.A.No.151 of 2009 for interim stay and the same was considered by the Appellate Court and granted interim order on 30.08.2010 against which, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioners who are the respondents in the above appeal in A.S.No.73 ...
Bensam and Others Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kanyakumari Dist ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the Petitioner's JCB bearing Registration No.TN72 AD-1839 seized by the second respondent on 7.8.2016, now under the custody of the first respondent.) 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. According to the Petitioner, he is the owner of JCB bearing Registration No.TN72 AD-1839 and the Registration of the vehicle stand in his name. It comes to be known that on 7/8/2016 at about 9.10. a.m, while the Petitioner's driver was loading minor mineral(excavated soil from the well) on a mini lorry for agricultural purpose, the Second Respondent/The Inspector of Police, Thiruvattar Police Station, Kanyakumari District had intercepted and seized his vehicle without any valid reason, saying that his driver had loa...
U. Megala Vs. The Principal Secretary to Government, School Education ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to issue duplicate Transfer Certificate to the Petitioner's daughter namely U.vishali on the basis of the Petitioner's representation, dated 1.7.2016.) 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has made an endorsement in the typed-set of papers of the Writ Petition to the effect that the writ petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
M/s. Kamalesh Kumar Sheth (HUF), Chennai Vs. The Tax Recovery Officer, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the first respondent and quash the impugned order of attachment of immovable property in T.R.No.1236/2015-16, AAJFR4948R, dated 25.01.2016, passed by the first respondent under Rule 48 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961, and direct him to consider the request made by the firm, M/s.RJK Investments, for accepting two properties offered as securities, in respect of its dues.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents / Department. Since the issue involved in this writ petition lies on a narrow campus, with the consent of the learned counsel for both sides, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, challenging the order of attachment passed by the f...
E. Pappy Vs. The Presiding Officer, Additional Labour Court, Vellore a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the Award dated 09.12.2010, made in I.D.No.14 of 2005, on the file of Additional Labour Court, Vellore and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner in her job with all back wages and continuity of service and all other monetary and other benefits applicable.) 1. The petitioner joined the second respondent-Company as a helper in B Section and the monthly salary drawn by the petitioner was Rs.4,500/-. On 03.02.1999, the petitioner was removed from service without assigning any reason by the second respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner raised an Industrial Dispute in I.D.No.146 of 1999 before the Labour Court, Vellore. After contest, the Labour Court, by its Award dated 21.05.2001, directed the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner with backwages and continuity of ser...
M. Jamal Mohamed and Another Vs. P.K. Sundaram and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act 18 of 1960 as amended by Act 23 of 1974 and Act 1 0f 1960, praying against the fair and decreetal orders passed in R.C.A.No.1616 of 2003 dated 07.01.2009, on the file of VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes at Chennai (Rent Control Appellate Authority) confirming the fair and decreetal order passed in R.C.O.P.No.438 of 2001 dated 17.12.2002, on the file of the XVth Judge, Court of Small Causes at Chennai (Rent Controller).) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Civil Revision petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
M. Devaki Vs. The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(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 pertaining the impugned order of the 1st Respondent in Na.Ka. NO. V5/5187/2012 dated 21.02.2014 and quash the same and consequently, direct the 1st Respondent to appoint the petitioner as Noon Meal Organiser at Pillakurichi Panchayat Primary School in Karambakudi Panchayat, Pudukkottai district and pass such further or other orders.) 1. This writ petition is listed today under the caption for withdrawal on the basis of letter of requisition given by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner to the Registry. 2. Recording the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed....
C. Hepsiba Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Departm ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-19-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.07.2016 and to appoint the petitioner to the post of B.T.Assistant (Maths) in Maanur Panchayat Elementary School.) 1. The petitioner herein, Mrs.C.Hepsiba, who is presently serving as a B.T.Assistant (Maths) at Vasudevanallur Panchayat Middle School, Tirunelveli District, since 2010 onwards, has come up with this Writ Petition for a direction to the respondents to transfer her at Maanur Panchayat Union Middle School, Tirunelveli District, where his husband is working. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she is presently working at Maanur Panchayat Union Middle School, Tirunelveli District on deputation basis and that on account of the promotion of one Sivabalakrishnan, promoted as Headmaster, there is a vacancy in the said School. In this regard, the petitioner has sent a representation t...