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.
P. Mohanraj Mathuram Constantine, Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu, re ...
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 CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in TNSTC/KUM/E1/603/2012 dated 14.06.2012 quash the same and further direct the respondents to treat all the petitioners as Junior Assistants from the date of their original appointment as Clerk in the 2nd respondent Corporation and to give additional increment all monetary and consequential benefits including periodical reviews from the date of entry into service and to pass such further or other orders.) 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In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.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....
Balaji Cartons, Rep. By its Partner V. Nagaraj, Madurai District Vs. T ...
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 Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the respondent herein in TIN 3327 5041809/2014-15, dated 30.06.2016 and quash the same as illegal, in valid, without jurisdiction and in violation of the principles of natural justice, and consequently, direct the respondent to grant a copy of the assessment proposals (D3 proposal) of the Enforcement Wing for 2014-15 and after granting to the petitioner an opportunity to submit reply and a personal hearing, pass orders according to law.) 1. M/s.Balaji Cartons rep. by its Partner, V.Nagaraj has filed the present writ petition questioning the correctness of the order passed by the respondent Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Thirumangalam, Madurai, in TIN-3327 5041809/2014-15, dated 30.06.2016, wherein, on the basis of the surprise inspection made on 30.12.2014 under Section 65 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax ...
Union of India, Rep. by the Secretary, Government of India, Department ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-09-2016
(Prayer in W.P.No.35386 of 2012 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the common order passed by the second respondent in O.A.Nos.551/2008, dated 30.10.2009 and quash the same and direct the first respondent to accept the petitioner's office Memorandum No. CAT/98-Admn/R-806 (N)/272, dated 15.03.1999.) Common Order P. Kalaiyarasan, J. 1. These writ petitions have been filed, seeking direction to issue orders in the nature of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the common order, dated 30.10.2009 in O.A.No.51 of 2008 and connected 8 other Original Applications passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal of Madras Bench and direct the first respondent to accept the petitioner's Office Memorandum, dated 15.03.1999. 2. The facts leading to these writ petitions in nutshell are as follows : [a] These writ petitions have been filed by the Union of India and A...
Vendanthipillai and Others Vs. C. Kaja Mohideen
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-09-2016
(Prayer: The Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree dated 27.09.2004 made in A.S.No.83 of 2002 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam, modifying the judgment and decree in O.S.No.647 of 1996 dated 27.02.2002 passed by the District Munsif, Uthamapalayam.) 1. The Second Appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 27.09.2004 in A.S.No.83 of 2002 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam, modifying the judgment and decree in O.S.No.647 of 1996 dated 27.02.2002 passed by the learned District Munsif, Uthamapalayam. 2. The defendants, who have lost the legal battle in the First Appellate Court, have come forward with this Second Appeal. 3. The respondent as a plaintiff, who is a court auction purchaser, filed a suit for recovery of possession on the basis of the sale certificate issued to him in E.P.No.100 of 1984 in O.S.No.158 of 1982. The defendants 2 to 4, who are the sons of the 1st defendant, are the judgment debtor i...
Jothi Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Bhavani Taluk, Erode ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment dated 09.12.2015 in S.C.No.120 of 2015 on the file of the Sessions Court, Mahila Court (Fast Track Court), Erode.) This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgment dated 09.12.2015 in S.C.No.120 of 2015 on the file of the Sessions Court, Mahila Court (Fast Track Court), Erode, convicting the appellant/accused for the offence under Section 304 (Part-2) IPC and sentencing her to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default, to undergo six months simple imprisonment. 2. The gist of the prosecution case leading to conviction of the appellant/accused is that on 19.10.2014 at about 6.30 a.m., P.W.1 Myilsamy went to see the Panchayat Water Tank, since there was no flow of water in the Village. While he was so proceeding, he saw the appellant/Jothi sitting in the pial of her house and crying. When P.W.1 enquired, she said that her husband left the house four days before an...
Karuppaiah Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakkottai, Sivagangai ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-09-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to pass final orders on the appeal filed by the Petitioner in Na.Ka.No.A3/3998/2015, dated :....08.2015, pending on his file, within the reasonable time fixed 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 Respondent. 4. According to the Petitioner, his appeal in Na.Ka.No.A3/3998/2015, dated :...08.2015 is pending on the file of the Respondent/The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ram Nagar, Devakkottai, Sivagangai District till date, without any progress or disposal. It appears that on 3.3.2016 in the appeal, arguments of both sides were heard and orders were reserved. 5. The grievance of the Petitioner is that till date, no orders have been passed by the Respondent in the subject-matter in issue. It is to be noted that the a...
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Tourism Development Corporation, Che ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-09-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the Judgment and Decree of the II Additional District Judge, Tiruchirappalli made in A.S.No.23 of 2015, dated 14.08.2015, confirming the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.704 of 2014 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Tiruchirappalli, dated 30.04.2015.) 1. The appellants, as defendants who lost the legal battle before both the Courts below have come forward with this Second Appeal challenging the Decree and Judgment passed in A.S.No.23 of 2015, dated 14.08.2015, by the II Additional District Judge, Tiruchirappalli by confirming the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.704 of 2014 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli, dated 30.04.2015. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Counsel for the respondents and perused the materials available on record. 3. The respondent herein as plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defe...
M/s. Arpita Telecom and Computer Services Pvt.Ltd., rep.by its Directo ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-09-2016
(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to reassess Bill of Entry No.7618341 dated 8.12.2014 by granting exemption from payment of customs duty and other levies totaling to Rs.10,10,860/- by extending the benefit of Customs Notification No.39/96 dated 23.7.1996 as amended by Notification No.60/96 dated 22.8.1996 in terms of the Customs Duty Exemption Certificate dated 26.2.2015 for the supplies made to the Defence Establishments and consequently on such re-assessment, direct the 3rd respondent to grant refund.) Mr.Rajkumar Jhabakh, learned Senior Panel Counsel accepts notice for the respondents. Heard both. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The prayer sought for by the petitioner is to direct the first respondent to re-assess the bill of entry dated 8.12.2014 by granting exemption from payment of customs duty. 3. The petitioner imported certain g...
S. Angayarkanni Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by its Principal Secr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-09-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to transfer the petitioner to the available vacant post of Secondary Grade Teacher within Karipatti Union in Virudhungar District ahead of the regular deployment transfer and transfer within the union/district.) 1. The petitioner herein, Mrs.S.Angayarkanni, presently serving as a Secondary Grade Teacher at Alangayam Union, Vellore District, from 22.07.2014 onwards, by stating that on 09.11.2015 her husband passed away due to sudden heart attack and that she is left with a daughter, aged about five years, sought for transfer from Vellore to her native place, namely, Virudhungar District through her representations dated 16.12.2015 and 22.07.2016. It is stated that, as per Clause No.7 found in G.O.Ms.(1D)No.258, School Education Department, dated 06.07.2016, those teachers, who lost the spouse on disease or on illness after 01.06.2015, can be ...
Vigneshwaran @ Vignesh Ram Rep. by his father Rajaiyan Mulamkuzhi Vila ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-09-2016
S. Vimala, J. 1. It is an application seeking a direction to the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Nagercoil, to consider and pass orders on the bail petition filed by the petitioner on the same day of his appearance in Crime No.325 of 2016 on the file of the respondent Police. A case has been registered against the petitioner, who is stated to be aged 17 years, under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) IPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondents. 3. When a specific question was posed as to why a direction is required in a case where bail is mandatory under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the bail application of the juvenile is not being considered on the same day of appearance, as the Juvenile Justice Board wants the report of the Probation Officer before the grant of bail an...