Chennai Court September 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.
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-2016
M. Venugopal, J. 1. Heard Mr.R.Sankarasubbu, Learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.P.Govindarajan, Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent/Complainant. 2. The Petitioner/Appellant/Accused has preferred the present Crl.A.No.545 of 2016 before this Court, as against the judgment dated 02.06.2016 in Spl.S.C.No.21 of 2014 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Vellore. 3. It transpires that the Petitioner/Appellant/Accused was found guilty by the Learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethi Mandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Vellore in respect of an offence under Section 341 (2 counts) of IPC and under Sec.4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 by means of a judgment dated 02.06.2016. However, the Petitioner/Appellant/Accused was found not guilty in respect of the offences under Section 323 and 506(i) of IPC. In respect of the offences under Section 341 (2 counts), the Petitioner/Appellant/Accused was convic...
Rajkumar and Another Vs. Chellammal
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-21-2016
1. The defendants in O.S. No. 242 of 2007 has filed Second Appeal (MD) No. 370 of 2016 as against the judgment and decree in A.S. No. 28 of 2012 on the file of the Sub Court, Srivilliputhur, confirming the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 242 of 2007 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Srivilliputhur. 2. The appellants in S.A.(MD)No. 370 of 2016 are also the appellants in S.A.(MD)No. 371 of 2016 and this second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree in A.S. No. 29 of 2012 on the file of the Sub Court, Srivilliputhur as against the judgment and decree in Cross Objection in O.S. No. 242 of 2007 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Srivilliputhur. 3. The respondent in these two second appeals filed a suit in O.S. No. 242 of 2007 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Srivilliputhur, originally for permanent injunction restraining the appellants herein from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the s...
R. Dhanalaskmi and Others Vs. P. Suguna and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-2016
(Prayer: Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 Civil Procedure Code praying for a judgment and decree against the defendants for the following: a) For partition of the schedule mentioned property into six equal shares and allot 1/6th share to the 1st plaintiff 1/6th share the 2nd plaintiff and 1/6th share to the 3rd plaintiff (in all 3/6th share to the plaintiffs) taking into account all the facts pertaining to the location and value of the schedule mentioned property by appointing an Advocate Commissioner; b) Directing the 1st defendant to render proper accounts of the rental collections from 17.03.2006; c) For permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 8, their agents, servants and men and everyone claiming under them or acting on their behalf from in any way alienating or encumbering the schedule mentioned property without giving the plaintiffs their 3/6th share by metes and bounds; d) For a permanent injunction restrainin...
Shyna @ Shyni @ Shoba @ Rajee and Others Vs. The Secretary, Government ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-2016
(Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition No.2268 of 2015: This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for calling of entire records relating to the order of detention passed by the 3rd respondent in Crl.M.P.No.4/NSA/E4 dated 16.07.2015 detaining the petitioner/detenue-Shyna @ Shyni @ Shoba @ Rajee, aged about 42 years, W/o. Roopesh @ Prasanth @ Praveen @ Prakash @ Ruban @ Kariyan and for issuance of a writ setting aside the said order of detention and to set the petitioner/detenue, who has been now confirmed at Central Prison, Coimbatore, at liberty forthwith.) Common Order: S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. In all these Habeas Corpus Petitions, the preventive detention orders passed under sub-section (3) of Section 3 of The National Security Act, 1980 [Central Act 65 of 1980], by the 3rd respondent are under challenge. 2.0 The circumstances under which these detention orders came to be issued by the 3rd respondent are, in brief, as follows:- 2.1. On 04.05.2015 at about 03.00 ...
The Correspondent St. Aloysius High School, Kanyakumari District Vs. T ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-21-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 4th respondent District Educational Officer to approve forthwith the appointment of Tmt.S.Sheeba as BT Assistant (Maths) in the petitioner's school and disburse the grant - in-aid towards her salary allowance w.e.f the date of her appointment viz. 02.06.2014.) Order: S. Vimala, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the fourth respondent to approve the appointment of one S.Sheeba as BT Assistant (Maths) in the petitioner's school and disburse the grant- in-aid towards her salary allowance with effect from the date of her appointment viz., 02.06.2014. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader who takes notice for the respondents. By consent the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. 3. The petitioner is a recognised...
M. Radhamani Vs. Gomathiammal and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-21-2016
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.29 of 2003 on the file of the Sub Court, Sankarankovil, dated 16.12.2003 confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No. 131 of 2000 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sankarankovil, dated 24.02.2003.) 1. This second appeal has been filed by the first defendant in the suit as against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court in A.S.No.29 of 2003 on the file of Sub Court, Sankarankovil, confirming the judgment and decree of trial Court in O.S.No.131 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Court, Sankarankovil. 2. The third respondent in this appeal filed a suit in O.S.No.131 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Sankarankovil, for partition and for separate possession of 1/4th share in the suit properties and for mesne profit. 3. The suit properties are described in the plaint in four items. Items 1 and 2 are house pr...
Union of India, Divisional Railway Manager, Tiruchirapalli and Another ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-21-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records on the file of the second respondent in O.A.No.749 of 2015, dated 07.08.2015 and quash the same.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this petition is to an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras, in O.A.No.749 of 2015, dated 7th August 2015, by which the Tribunal has directed the writ petitioners to examine the first respondent, for fitness under Class 'C-2', within two months, from the date of receipt of a copy of the order made in O.A.No.749 of 2015, and if he found fit, grant him appointment, within one month thereafter. 2. Short facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that the first respondent was successful in the written examination held, in pursuance of Employment Notice No.CEN.04/2010, issued by the Railway Recruitment Board, Personnel Branch, Southern Railway, for appointment to the post of Ticket Examiner. He ...
N. Rahini Vs. G. Ravi @ Ramesh Kumar
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-21-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order made in I.A.No.554 of 2006 in H.M.O.P.No.260 of 2006 dated 10.4.2008, on the file of the Family Court, Madurai.) 1. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 20.09.2016, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner and hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for dismissal' today. Even today also, there is no representation on behalf of the Petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent was also called absent. 2. In view of the above, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs....
Alamelu and Another Vs. Rajamanickam Ammal and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-20-2016
(Common Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order dated 09.02.2016 passed in I.A.Nos.45 and 46 of of 2016 in O.S.No.102 of 2004 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Salem.) Common Order 1. The petitioners filed an application in I.A.No.46 of 2016 in O.S.No.2014 before the trial Court with a prayer to send the Will dated 16.09.1998 to the Forensic Department, Chennai along with the Thumb Impression Register containing the thumb impression of Venkataraja Konar for comparison and expert opinion. 2. The petitioners have also filed an application in I.A.No.45 of 2016 to send for the documents from the Office of Sub Registrar, Valapady for the purpose of comparison. 3. The learned trial Judge dismissed both the applications primarily on the ground that the Will has to be proved in the manner required under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act and Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act. Feeling aggrieved...
M. Mahoboob Jan Vs. The Director, Town and Country Planning, Anna Sala ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-20-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to proceedings in the resolution No.4 placed a Subject No.4 dated 08.04.2010 as referred to in the proceedings of the 3rd respondent in Roc No.1088/2010 TLPA dated 11.08.2010 and quash the same and all further proceedings and pass such further or other orders.) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has circulated a letter dated 12.09.2016 to the Registry seeking withdrawal of this writ petition. 2. Recording the same, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed....
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- Next ›
- Last »