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. Sekar and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Ceriorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st respondent relating to G.O.Ms.No.99, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (CGS.3) Department, dated 07.07.2015 stating that the claim for regularisation and fixing time scale of pay to the petitioners cannot be complied with and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders regularizing the service of the petitioners and to fix time scale of pay as per the recommendations made by the respondents 3 and 5, dated 08.06.1999, 25.09.2000, 05.11.2001 and 27.12.2004 and as per order of this Court, dated 04.04.2013, passed in W.P.No.9871 of 2008 and grant such other reliefs.) 1. The Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the 1st respondent viz., Secretary to Government in G.O.(Ms.) No.99, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (CGS.3) Department, dated 07.07.2015, wherein, the claim of th...
G. Sakthivel Vs. The District Collector, Thiruchy District and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st Respondent to grant permission to the petitioner for quarrying Gravel sand, forthwith, in S.No.95/1 in Pattalapettai Village, Thiruvarambur Taluk, Thiruchirappalli, in an extent of 5.70.0 Hectare based on the application submitted by the Petitioner to the 1st Respondent, on 10.03.2015 to forthwith.) 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 Respondents 1 and 2. 4. According to the Petitioner, on 10.03.2015, he submitted an application before the First Respondent / District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District, for quarrying out gravel sand from the Pattalapettai Tank in S.No.95/1, measuring an extent of 5.70.0 Hectares, as the tank was filled up by the deposition of gravel sand brought by sourcing canals for decades together. As a matter of fact, the Petiti...
R. Santharaman Vs. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to pay all the terminal benefits payable to the petitioner including Gratuity, Leave Salary together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of his retirement to till the date of payment within the stipulated time.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondent 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 respondent 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 respondent 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 Divisi...
Rajendran Vs. State by Inspector of Police, Karumatthampatti Police St ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
S. Nagamuthu.J 1. The appellant is A.1 in S.C.No.53 of 2015 on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore. A.2 was one Mrs.Muthulakshmi. A.1 stood charged for offences under Sections 120(B) r/w 302 and 302 I.P.C., and A.2 stood charged for offences under Sections 120(B), 109 r/w 302 I.P.C. By judgment dated 14.03.2016, the trial Court convicted A.1 for offence under Sections 302 and 120(B) I.P.C., and A.2 for offence under Section 302 r/w 120(B) I.P.C. For the said offences, the trial Court sentenced the accused to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The judgment is silent as to whether the said punishment has been imposed for the proved offence under Section 302 I.P.C., or under Section 120(B) I.P.C. The trial Court has not given any finding in respect of the charge under Section 302 r/w 109 I.P.C. Challenging the above said conviction and sentence, the appellan...
A. Skylab and Others Vs. The Director, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(Prayers in W.P (MD) No.13931 of 2016 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to pass on order so as to promote petitioner to the post of B.T Assistant Teacher (English) in the existing vacancy i.e., at Government Adi Dravidar Welfare Higher Secondary School, Idayankulam, Virudhunagar District in the light of the request made by the 2nd respondent vide his letter in Na.Ka.No.T2/7125/2015 signed on 24.12.2015 during the time of forthcoming general counseling. W.P (MD) No.13932 of 2016 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to pass on order so as to promote petitioner to the post of B.T Assistant Teacher (English) in the existing vacancy i.e., at Government Adi Dravidar Welfare Higher Secondary School, Elumbur, Madurai District during the time of forthcoming general counseling which is schedu...
T. Udayappan Vs. Karthikayeeni and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(Prayer:Contempt Petitions filed to initiate Contempt Proceedings under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 to punish the Contemnor/Second Respondent for wilfully and deliberately disobeyed the order of this Court made in W.P(MD)No.l4993 of 2014, dated 12.6.2015.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. It is represented on behalf of the Respondent/Contemnor that the Respondent/Tahsildar, Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District had passed an order on 29.6.2016, inter-alia stating that presently against the judgement passed in O.S.No.526 of 1988, the appeal filed by the Petitioner is pending and that the Tahsildar cannot grant/issue patta for more than three cents in respect of a land coming under UDR Scheme and furthermore, if patta is to be issued for more than three cents of land, then the jurisdiction lies with the Commissioner of Land Administration, Chennai. 3. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner strenuously projects an argument that this Court in W.P(MD)No.4993 of 201...
R. Periasamy Vs. The Tahsildar, Dindigul District
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(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 grant patta in the Petitioner's name which is relating to punja lands in S.No.292/6, admeasuring 99 cents out of 1 acre and 65 cents situated at Koovanoothu Villagbe, Nilakkottai Taluk, Dindigul District based on the Petitioner's representation dated 27.1.2016.) 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, the punja land in S.No.292/6, measuring an extent of 99 cents out of 1 acre and 65 cents, situated at Koovanoothu Village, Nilakkottai Taluk, Dindigul District originally belonged to one Mr.Rajendran, Mr.Alagar and Mr.Manoharan. The Petitioner had purchased the above said land from them through their Power Agent Mr.S.Solaipandian by means of Sale Deed vide Document No.1838 of 2009 on 4....
P. Seerangan Vs. State, By Inspector of Police, Anthiyur Police Statio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court (F.T.C.), Erode, in S.C.No.126 of 2014, dated 31.03.2016.) S. Nagamuthu. J. 1. The appellant, who is aged about 50 years, is the sole accused in S.C.No.126 of 2014, on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court (Mahila Court), Erode. He stood charged for the offence under Section 376 (1) IPC., By judgment, dated 31.03.2016, the trial court convicted him under Section 376 (1) IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:- P.W.1 is a resident of Chennampatti Village, Jerathal, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District. P.Ws.2 to 6 are his neighbours. P.W.8 is his sister. S...
M. Palaniselvam Vs. The District Collector, Thiruchy District and Anot ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st Respondent to grant permission to the petitioner for quarrying Gravel sand, forthwith, in S.No.17/2(P) in Alagapuri Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Thiruchirapalli, in an extent of 6.12.0 Hectares, based on the application submitted by the Petitioner to the 1st Respondent on 09.03.2015 to forthwith.) 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 Respondents 1 and 2. 4. According to the Petitioner, on 09.03.2015, he submitted an application before the First Respondent / District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District, for quarrying out gravel sand from the Alagapuri Government Poramboke land in S.No.17/2(P), measuring an extent of 6.12.0 Hectares, as the tank was filled up by the deposition of gravel sand brought by sourcing canals for decades together. As a matter of...
L. Subbiah and Others Vs. The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-08-2016
(Prayers: 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.1,33,090/- towards Leave Salary together with 18% interest per annum, along with interest amount towards the delayed payment of EPF Employee's Contribution amount Rs.3,64,709/- for the period from 31.05.12 to 02.12.12 at the rate as per EPF Scheme and further directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to pay him interest amount towards the delayed payment of Pension Commutation amount Rs.2,30,035/- for the period from 01.06.12 to 23.10.13 at the rate of 18% interest p.a., within a stipulated time.) 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...
- ‹ Prev
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- Next ›
- Last »