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.
Periyasamy Vs. State by The Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the 1st accused in S.C.No.37 of 2014 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahalir Court, Villupuram. The 2nd accused was one Mrs.Pappa. The 1st accused stood charged for offence under Section 302 of IPC and the 2nd accused stood charged for offences under Sections 294-b and 302 read with 109 of IPC. By judgment dated 11.06.2015, the trial court acquitted the 2nd accused. But convicted the 1st accused alone under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant/1st accused is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: (a) The deceased in this case was one Mrs.Karupayee. She was a resident of Karuthalangurichi Village in Villupuram District. P.W.1 Mrs.Selvi is her daughter. The deceased has got two sons. One of...
Sivakumar and Others Vs. State, by The Inspector of Police, Andimadam ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
(Prayer: Criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgement dated 17.11.2015 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur, in S.C.No.64 of 2014.) V. Bharathidasan, J. 1. The appellants in this appeal are the accused in Sessions Case No.64 of 2014, on the file of thelearned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur. They stood charged as detailed below:- ad>Serial number of chargesCharge(s) framed againstCharge(s) framed under1.A1U/s. 302 IPC2.A2U/s. 302 r/w 34 IPC3.A3U/s. 302 r/w 114 IPC 2. The trial Court, by Judgment dated 17.11.2015, convicted all the accused and sentenced them as detailed below:- ad>Rank of the accusedPenal provision(s) under which convictedSentenceA1U/s. 302 IPCImprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.A2U/s. 302 r/w 34 IPCImprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.A...
Tamilnadu Petroproducts Limited Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (CT), C ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
(Prayer: These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the proceedings of the second respondent herein in K.Dis.Act/11633/2004, dated 09.09.2004, while directing the first respondent herein to accept the Declaration to Form XVII issued by Hindustan Lever Limited, carrying on business at No.101, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600028, on the sale and delivery of Linear Alkyi Benzene to Ultra Marine Pigments Limited, at Door No.258, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Ranipet.) 1. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, engaged in the manufacture of Linear Alkyi Benzene (LAB) in their factory at Manali, Chennai. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner challenges a clarification issued by the second respondent, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, dated 09.09.2004, as well as the earlier clarification, dated 06.01.2004. Consequently the petitioner seeks for a direction upon the fir...
C. Elangovan Vs. The Executive Director, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. a ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2 nd respondent by proceedings dated 27.05.2016 in tender reference No.RCC/SR/TNSO/PT/42/15-16 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to substitute the name of the petitioner, C.Elangovan in 2 the tender reference No.RCC/ SR/TNSO/PT/42/15-16 in the place of the deceased E. Manimekalai.) 1. The petitioner would state that his wife viz., E.Manimekalai was a Transport Contractor for more than 10 years with the respondents corporation. The Marketing Division of the respondent corporation has floated tender for Road Transportation of Bulk Petroleum Products-MS/HSD/Branded Fuels vide Tender No.RCC/SR/TNSO/PT-42/15-16 and prior to that, the wife of the petitioner was issued with work order dated 01.03.2013 to enable her to operate as a Transport Contractor from 27.12.2012 upto 31.12.2015 and further extended for fo...
K.R. Veerappan Vs. Gurusamy District Forest Officer, Sivagangai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
(Prayer:Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying this Court tocall the Contemnor/Respondent for having wilfully and wantonly disobeying the order passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.3311 of 2013, dated 21.4.2015 and to punish him in accordance with the Law.) 1. Mr.Gurusamy, the Contemnor/Respondent is very much present before this Court. The 1presence of the Respondent/Contemnor is dispensed with. 2. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner had made an endorsement in the Contempt Petition to the effect that: ''Vehicle released. Not pressed.'' 3. Recording the aforesaid fact of the vehicle in question TN 39-H-0066 was released by the Respondent/Contemnor and also that, the Contempt Petition is not pressed by the Petitioner, the Contempt Petition stands dismissed as not pressed....
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
V.M. Velumani, J. 1. When the matter is taken up for hearing today under the caption 'for being mentioned', the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the order copy, the name of the second petitioner has been wrongly mentioned as Sevam instead of Selvam. 2. Heard the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side). 3. In view of the same, the Registry is directed to carry out the correction and issue fresh order copy. 4. Time is extended for a period of one week from today....
S. Jeba Paulin and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Pri ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
(Prayer: In all WPs:Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 2nd Respondent in connection with the impugned qualification prescribed in the call letter issued in Na.Ka. No.22/Ma.Pa. The Va/2012 dated 20.03.2013 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary in so far as the petitioner's case is concerned and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to issue appropriate advertisement for the post of Radiographer either by earmarking reservation for the Diploma holders or by fixing ration between the Diploma in radio Diagnosis Technology holders and Certified Radiological Assistant and thereby consider the petitioner's case within the time limit that may be stipulated b y this Court.) Common Order: 1. The petitioners/S.Jeba Paulin, K.Sangeetha, V.Maheswari and M.K.Syed Ali have filed these writ petitions challenging the impugned qualification prescribed in the call letter issued i...
S. Krishnaswamy Vs. The State of Tamilnadu, rep by the Secretary to Go ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Only), as compensation for the loss of vision, pain and suffering and permanent disability caused to the petitioner by the injury inflicted on him on 01.07.2001 and towards medical expenses incurred in connection therewith.) 1. The petitioner would state that he is an employee of The Vysya Bank Limited and have been working as ALPM Operator and was residing in Room No.52, Hotel Sri Vigneswara, Dhanappa Mudali Street, Madurai-625001. The petitioner would further state that his family members are living in Door No.19/27 (O), Radhika Avenue, P N Pudur, Coimbatore and he used to visit his family on Saturday nights and return to Madurai on Sunday night every week. According to the petitioner, on 30.06.2011, he came to Coimbatore to spend time with his family members and at that...
Suo Motu Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Chief Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
(Prayer: Suo-motu taken up petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as per the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in W.P. (Civil) No.79 of 2005, dated 31.01.2014 praying for Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents (a) to frame guidelines with respect to occupational safety and health regulations to be maintained by the various industries; (b) to appoint and to constitute a Committee for the monitoring of the working of Thermal Power Plants in Tamil Nadu and to keep check on the health and safety norms for the workers working in their Power Stations; (c) to pay compensation to the workers who are victims of occupational health disorders and to frame a scheme of compensation for workers in cases of occupational health disorders; (d) to notify the recommendations filed by the Occupational Health and Safety Association before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in W.P. (Civil) No.79 of 2005 and the guidelines to be followed by the Thermal Power Plants.) 1. ...
S. Alaguraj Vs. The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Forest Uniformed Serv ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-02-2016
(Prayer in W.P(MD)No.1876 of 2015: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF CERTIORARI to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the notification vide Impugned Advertisement No.1/2014 in Daily Thanthi dated 22.12.2014 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same insofar as the provision for maximum age limit and directing the first respondent to consider the candidature of the petitioner to the post of Forester vide the petitioner's application dated 21.01.2015 by relaxing the maximum age limit. Prayer in W.P(MD)No.12944 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS to direct the first respondent to consider the candidature of the petitioner to the post of Forester as an in-service candidate by permitting the petitioner to participate in the further selection process in pursuant to the notification in advertisement No.1 of 2014 dated 22.12....
- ‹ Prev
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- Next ›
- Last »