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.
Ram Ayodhya Tiwari and Others Vs. The State of Bihar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-11-2016
CAV Order: 1. Petitioners, who are accused of Rasulpur P. S. Case No.64 of 2015 leading to Sessions Trial No.655 of 2015, are aggrieved by an order dated 18.02.2016 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge-5th, Saran at Chapra whereby and whereunder the learned lower Court rejected the prayer made on their behalf in accordance with Section 228(1)(a) of the Cr.P.C. 2. Informant, Sunil Kumar Tiwari, gave his fard-beyan on 20.06.2015 at about 5.00 p.m. disclosing therein that on the same day at 12.30 hours, Ram Ayodhya Tiwari, Ghanshyam Tiwari @ Pawan Tiwari, Ashutosh Kumar Tiwari, wife of Ghanshyam Tiwari along with three unknown persons came and directed him for measurement of a land relating to which dispute was coming since before. On his disclosure, his father is not present and the measurement will be effected only in his presence, they began to abuse. On his protest, Ram Ayodhya Tiwari incited whereupon Ashutosh Tiwari took out farsa , gave blow over his head. Ghanshyam...
Union of India Rep. by its Secretary Ministry of Health and Family Wel ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-11-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated 22.11.2013 made in O.A. No.949 of 2011 on the file of the Registrar General, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Chennai the 5th respondent herein confirmed in R.A. 19/14 dated 16.6.2014 and quash the same.) A. Selvam, J. This writ petition has been directed against the order dated 22.11.2013 passed in Original Application No.949 of 2011 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Madras. 2. The respondents 1 to 4 herein, as applicants, have filed Original Application No.949 of 2011 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Madras praying to give necessary direction to the fourth respondent to regularize their service. 3. The Central Administrative Tribunal, after considering the divergent contentions raised on either side, has accepted the claim of the respondents 1 to 4/petiti...
S. Kanagaraj Vs. The Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar Welfare Dep ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-11-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in K.No.C/3604/2010/Tho.Nu.A2 dated 21.10.2014 and quash the same.) 1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has circulated a letter to the Registry seeking withdrawal of this Writ Petition. 2. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed....
M. Murugavalli Vs. The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Society, Co-ope ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-11-2016
(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 disburse the petitioner's cheque amount and her father's cheque amount to the petitioner and the petitioner's pending representation also to be disposed.) 1. The petitioner herein seeks for a direction to the respondents for disbursal of amounts as per the cheques issued by the Ramanathapuram District Mudhukulathur Taluk, Q1281, Pookulam Primary Agriculture Co-operative Credit Society to the petitioner as well as to her father. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the Ramanathapuram District Mudhukulathur Taluk, Q1281, Pookulam Primary Agriculture Co-operative Credit Society released the crop insurance amount for the year 2011-2012, that is Rs.48,000/- and Rs.25,600/- in favour of the petitioner and her father respectively. According to the petitioner, in the meanwhile, her father passed away without receiving the said amount and hence, s...
Sri Balaji Papers International Private Limited, Chennai Vs. Aspex pap ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code against the fair and final order dated 2.03.2015 in I.A.Nos.13021 of 2012 and 13037 of 2013 in I.A.No.13021 of 2012 in O.S.No.8520 of 2009 on the file of XII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.) Common Order 1. Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.Nos.13021 of 2012 and 13037 of 2013 in O.S.No.8520 of 2009 on the file of XII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, the defendant has filed the above Civil Revision Petitions. 2. The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.8520/2009 for recovery of a sum of Rs.6,00,236/- together with interest. Since the defendant failed to appear before the trial court, the trial court passed an exparte decree on 16.04.2010. Thereafter, the defendant filed an application in I.A.No.13021 of 2012 to condone the delay of 828 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree dated 16.4.2010. 3. In the affidavit, filed in support of the petitio...
C.B.M. College TANSAC Unit Rep.by its Secretary C.B.M. College, Coimba ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2016
(Prayer in both Writ Appeals: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 20.3.2012 passed in W.P.No.22684 of 2009.) Common Judgment: (A. Selvam, J.) These Writ Appeals are directed against the order dated 20.3.2012 passed in W.P.No.22684 of 2009 by the learned Single Judge of this Court. 2. The appellant in W.A.No.1239 of 2012, as petitioner, has filed W.P.No.22684 of 2009 on the file of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent in G.O.(Ms.) No.355 dated 25.9.2009 and quash the same. 3. The material averments made in the Writ Petition No.22684 of 2009 can be stated like thus:- The second respondent has been started by a public charitable Trust in the year 1974. During the year 1975-76, classes have been commenced. In the year 2009, it is found that the second respondent has not been functioning properly. The petitioner ...
C.B.M. College TANSAC Unit Rep.by its Secretary C.B.M. College, Coimba ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2016
(Prayer: in both Writ Appeals: WRIT APPEALS filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 20.3.2012 passed in W.P.No.22684 of 2009.) Common Judgment: A. Selvam, J 1. These Writ Appeals are directed against the order dated 20.3.2012 passed in W.P.No.22684 of 2009 by the learned Single Judge of this Court. 2. The appellant in W.A.No.1239 of 2012, as petitioner, has filed W.P.No.22684 of 2009 on the file of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent in G.O.(Ms.) No.355 dated 25.9.2009 and quash the same. 3. The material averments made in the Writ Petition No.22684 of 2009 can be stated like thus:- The second respondent has been started by a public charitable Trust in the year 1974. During the year 1975-76, classes have been commenced. In the year 2009, it is found that the second respondent has not been functioning properly. The petitioner...
Thangamani Vs. Rajkumar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-10-2016
(Prayer: Appeal suit filed under Section 96 of CPC against the judgment and decree, dated 31-07-2014, passed in O.S.No.105 of 2011 by the Principal District Judge, Villupuram.) A. Selvam, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal suit is to the judgment and decree dated 31-07-2014 passed in Original Suit No.105 of 2011 by the Principal District Court, Villupuram. 2. The respondent herein, as plaintiff, has initiated O.S.No.105 of 2011 on the file of the Trial Court praying to pass a decree of specific performance in pursuance of the sale agreement, dated 27-10-2010 wherein the present appellants have been shown as defendants. 3. In the plaint, it is averred that the suit property is the absolute property of the defendants and their deceased mother, and all of them have agreed to sell the same in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.65,00,000/-(Rupees Sixty five lakhs only) and to that effect a sale agreement has come into existence on 27- 10-2010 and on the date of its execution, the defendant...
R. Subburaj Vs. Venkatachalam and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-10-2016
(Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying this Court to punish the Respondents No.1 to 5 for the contempt committed by them in violating the order of this Court passed in M.P(MD)No.1 of 2015 in W.P(MD)No.20590 of 2015, dated 20.11.2015.) 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has made the following endorsement in the Contempt Petition: ''Since the Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.20590 of 2015 is withdrawn, this Contempt Peti tion in Cont.P(MD)No.25 of 2016 may also be dismissed as not pressed.'' 2. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the Contempt Petition is dismissed as not pressed....
A. Savari Dass Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport C ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-10-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF Mandamus directing the respondents to provide alternative job to the petitioner (Senior Tradesman) in the same scale of pay in the light of the Section 47 in the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation), Act 1995.) 1. The petitioner seeks for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide alternative job to him in the same scale of pay in the light of the Section 47 in the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation), Act 1995. 2. Mr.A.Jeyaram, learned standing counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3. The petitioner/Mr.A.Savari Dass was appointed as Assistant Tradesman under the respondent corporation on 11.10.1980 and thereafter, he was promoted as Senior Tradesman w...
- ‹ Prev
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- Next ›
- Last »