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.
Tvl. Chief Manager Indian Bank Kilpauk Branch, Chennai Vs. The Commiss ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned notice dated 22.12.2009, in Ref.Z.O.V.R.D.C.No.R1/3645/2009 in respect of the petitioner's property bearing NO.103, New Avadi Road,Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010, Municipal Division No.70 Zone V issued by the second respondent, quash the impugned notice and consequently forbear the respondent from levying demanding or recovering the property tax an incidental tax retrospectively in respect of the aforesaid building of the petitioner.) 1. Heard Mr.M.A.Lakshmipathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Dr.C.Ravichandran, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is the Indian Bank, Kilpauk Branch, Chennai, represented by its Chief Manager and they have filed this Writ Petition, challenging the communication sent by the second respondent, dated 22.12.2009, calling upon petit...
V. Palanichamy Vs. The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the Petitioner, dated 10.3.2015 against the order of the second respondent in Na.Ka.Pi.No.2/9144/2012, dated 4.2.2015.) 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, as against the order of the Second Respondent, dated 4.12.2015, he preferred an appeal before the First Respondent under Section 36(c) of the Tamil Nadu Mines and Minerals Act, 1959. In fact, the said appeal was projected on 10.3.2015, on various grounds. Till date, the said appeal is pending and the same is not yet disposed of. 5.The grievance of the Petitioner is that he was informed that the First Respondent/The District Collector, District Collector Campus, Ramanathapuram District had iss...
Santha Suresh and Others Vs. The Sub Registrar, Kodaikanal Sub Registr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the Registration of Document No.2499/2011, dated 12.12.2011 before the 1st Respondent herein and quash the same and the consequently direct the 1st Respondent herein to delete the entry of Settlement cancellation deed in Document No. 2499/2011, dated 12.12.2011 from the Encumbrance Certificate. Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the registration of the impugned gift settlement cancellation deed dated 19.04.2010 bearing document No.3171 of 2010 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same and consequentially directing the second respondent to delete the said entry from his file. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate for the official respondents. Though names ...
K. Chandralekha Vs. S. Ravikumar and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree dated 16.12.2014 passed in A.S.No.26 of 2014 on the file of the Sub-Court, Tambaram reversing the fair and decretal order dated 21.03.2014 passed in I.A.No.126 of 2014 in O.S.No.157 of 2012 before the Principal District Munsif, Alandur.) The appellant is the 5th defendant in a suit for declaration to declare various sale deeds executed commencing from the year 1991 to 2010 as null and void; for a direction to the District Revenue Officer to cancel the patta issued to the defendants 1 to 19 and to issue fresh patta to the plaintiff and his family members; for a mandatory injunction directing certain defendants to remove illegal construction put up by them; for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 19 from in any manner interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 19 from encumbering...
S. Meera Vs. P. Narasimman
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 24 C.P.C., to transfer F.C.O.P.No.1922 of 2015 pending on the file of the learned III Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai to be tried along with H.M.O.P.No.158/2015 pending on the file of the Family Court, Tiruchirapalli for enquiry and disposal.) 1. TAMIL goes a good old Tamil proverb. Gone are the days when it was the order of the day. Is it possible to take the saying seriously and follow it, in letter and spirit? Exactly, that is what the respondent wants the petitioner to follow. 2. It is shameful to note that women, even toddlers are raped, and murdered; girls are killed shockingly due to one side love; women folk are teased and physically abused every day. Shockingly gang rapes are reported almost every part of India and recently a gang of dacoits raped a woman and her 14 year old minor daughter on 29.07.2016 on NH-01 in Bulandshahr District UP, by waylaying and dragging them out of their car. Crimes against women and girl children are a...
NLC Jeeva Oppantha Thozhilalar Sangam, Affiliated to AITUC, rep.by The ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order passed in W.P.No.3222 of 2012, dated 10.02.2012.) A. Selvam, J. This Writ Appeal has been directed against the order dated 10.02.2012, passed in W.P.No.3222 of 2012, by the learned single Judge of this Court. 2. The appellant herein, as petitioner, has filed W.P.No.3222 of 2012, on the file of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the contract workers to participate in the secrete ballot and to receive duly filled in annexure appended with the letter dated 31.01.2012, wherein, the present respondents have been arrayed as respondents. 3. In the petition it is averred that the appellant/petitioner is nothing but a Union of contract workers. The contract workers are doing their service under the management of the first respondent. But they have not been allowed to exercise their right of secret ballot. Under the said ci...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
T. Raja, J. 1. The first respondent has passed the order impugned in this Writ Petition dated 05.07.2016, in and by which, the joint family property belonging both to the petitioner and the second respondent has been brought to public auction, as the second respondent has siphoned off the funds belonging to the first respondent. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that since there is no demarcation made between the petitioner and the second respondent and admittedly, the second respondent who is facing recovery proceedings at the hands of the first respondent, the petitioner cannot be put to any prejudice. So along as the property is properly demarcated or subdivided in respect of the property in question, it is highly impossible for the first respondent to bring the property into auction. In any event, the petitioner has no objection in selling away the half of the property in question belonging to the second respondent. 3. The learned Government Advocate submitted that since it is ...
S. Karthikeyan and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by the Secr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned seniority list in the cadre of High School Head Masters for promotion to the post of Higher Secondary School Headmasters in Na.Ka.No.98776/W.1/E1/2015 dated 29.06.2016 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to prepare a combined seniority list in the cadre of Post Graduate Assistants including the Headmasters of the High School for the sake of promotion to the post of Higher Secondary School Headmasters.) 1. The petitioners have come forward with the above Writ Petition praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the impugned seniority list in the cadre of High School Headmasters for promotion to the post of Higher Secondary School Head Masters in Na.Ka.No.98776/W.1/E1/2015 ...
Kavin Vivek and Another Vs. State, represented by the Inspector of Pol ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer in Crl.O.P. No.30625 of 2015: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the final report in C.C. No.99 of 2015 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai.) Common Order 1. These Criminal Original Petitions are filed seeking to quash the final report in C.C. No.99 of 2015 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai. 2. The facts obtaining in this case embody the anxiety of India s educated village youth to get State employment and how their yearnings can be exploited by charlatans at high places. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their name. 4. A. Ganapathy, aged 60 years, is a Press Reporter and he knows D.Vivekanandan, I.A.S. (A2) and his son Kavin Vivek (A1) intimately. D.Vivekanandan, I.A.S., (A2) during 2013, was working as Project Director in Tamil Nadu State AIDS Control Society in the cadre of Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu and he was living with his son at ...
Dr. M. Manuneethi Cholan Vs. State Rep. by The Deputy Superintendent o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-05-2016
(Prayer:Petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records in connection with C.C.No.1 of 2016 on the file of the learned XII Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai and to quash the same.) 1. The Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner praying to quash the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2016 pending on the file of the learned XII Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai, as against the petitioner herein. In the said case, the petitioner herein has been arrayed as the 1st accused. 2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are as follows:- 2-1. The petitioner herein/A1 joined Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India in the year 1990. During the period from 01.11.2013 to 26.08.2014 ie., till the date of his suspension, the petitioner/A1 was holding the post of Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu and Andaman and Nicobar Islands, at Chennai. The petitioner/A1 is a Public Servant within the meaning of Sectio...
- ‹ Prev
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- Next ›
- Last »