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.
T. Lakshmipriya and Others Vs. NIL
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order and decreetal order dated 05.03.2014 in Trust O.P.No.58 of 2013 on the file of the District Court II, Kanchipuram.) 1. The above Civil Revision Petition arises against the order passed in Trust O.P.No.58 of 2013, filed under Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920, on the file of the District Court II, Kanchipuram. 2. The petitioners filed the Original Petition under Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 praying the Court to give its opinion, advice or direction to the petitioners, who are the Managing Trustee and Trustees of Veerasamy Mudaliar Charities, to pursue the resolution dated 04.04.2012 to demolish the existing rear portion of the Marriage Hall and construct a commercial complex in terms of the sanctioned plan obtained by the Trust and for this purpose, to procure bank loan of Rs.2 crores from South Indian Bank, Kanchipuram or any oth...
Rosemarry Vs. The Inspector of Police and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Judgment and conviction dated 23.04.2014, made in S.C.No.140 of 2011 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Pudukkottai.) S. Nagamuthu, J 1. This is an appeal against acquittal. The respondents 2 to 4 were the accused Nos.1 to 3 in S.C.No.140 of 2011 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai. The first accused stood charged for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, the second accused stood charged for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the third accused stood charged for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Vide judgment dated 23.04.2014, the Trial Court acquitted all the accused from all charges. Challenging the said acquittal, the wife of the deceased, who is the defacto complainant in this case, has c...
Mahaboob Vs. M. Beema and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, against the fair passed in I.A.No.126 of 2009 in O.S.No.7 of 2004, dated 12.2.2010, on the file of the Ist Additional District Judge, Tirunelveli.) 1. The learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Civil Revision Petition and has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed. No costs....
S. Tamilarasi and Others Vs. Union of India Rep. by The General Manage ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
(Prayer in W.P.No.36782 of 2015: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus or any other writ or order or direction in the nature of writ, calling for the records of the common order, dated 08.07.2015 made in O.A.Nos.1229 to 1232 of 2014 of the third respondent herein, namely, the Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, City Civil Court Complex, High Court Buildings, Chennai - 600 104 and quash the common order in so far as O.A.No.1230 of 2014 filed by the petitioner is concerned as nonest in the eye of law and consequently allow the O.A.No.1230 of 2014 as prayed for and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein, namely the Union of India, rep, by the General Manager, Souther Railway, Park Town, Chennai - 600 003 and the Chief Workshop Manager, Golder Rock Railway Workshop, Southern Railway, Ponmalai, Tiruchirapalli - 620 004, to sanction compassionate allowance / family pens...
Senthilkumar Vs. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Secretary to Governme ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records in detention order passed in Cr.M.P.No.10/2016 dated 20.05.2016on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and set aside the same as illegal and direct the respondents to produce the petitioner namely Senthilkumar, Son of Jegannathan, male aged 35 years, who is detained in Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli before this Court and set him at liberty.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The petitioner is the detenu. He has been detained as per the order of the 2nd respondent under Section 2(b) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, branding him as 'Bootlegger'. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents and we have also perused the records carefully. 3. Though several grounds have been raised in the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned counsel for the Petitioner would mainly focus his argument on the grou...
Murugesan Vs. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C., against the judgment, dated 21.11.2014 in S.C.No.175 of 2010 on the file of the Sessions Court, Mahila Court, Coimbatore.) This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgment dated 21.11.2014 in S.C.No.175 of 2010 on the file of the Sessions Court, Mahila Court, Coimbatore, in and by which, the appellant/accused was convicted and sentenced as tabulated hereunder: Sl.No.Convictionunder SectionSentence of imprisonmentFine1Section 498-AIPCone year rigorousimprisonmentRs.2,000/-, in default, toundergo three monthssimple imprisonment2Section 306 IPCten years rigorousimprisonmentRs.5,000/-, in default, toundergo six monthssimple imprisonment The trial Court ordered the sentences imposed on the appellant/accused to run concurrently. 2. The case of the prosecution leading to conviction of the appellant/accused is as follows: The marriage between the appellant herein and the deceased Maheswari took place in the year 2007. At the time of m...
The Secretary to Government, Highways and Minor Ports (HK1) Department ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
S. Vaidyanathan, J. 1. Respondent was selected and appointed by Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission by direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Engineer in Highways Department and she worked up to 19.10.2005. Leave was sanctioned to the respondent by the Government initially for a period of three years from 20.10.2005, which was subsequently extended by two years. Thus, totally, she was sanctioned a leave of five years by the Government. In the interregnum, the respondent was considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer and she was empanelled for the same. 2. According to the respondent, in terms of Rule 36 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules, in short, "the Rules", she respondent was entitled to be promoted with effect from 09.01.2008, by which date, the panel had been drawn, and, accordingly, she ought to have been promoted to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer. It is her further case that since she was in U.S.A., she returned to ...
The Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Fo ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
V.M. Velumani, J 1. This Writ Appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 26.06.2013, made in W.P.(MD)No.7886 of 2013. 2. The respondent filed above Writ Petition seeking a direction to the appellants to appoint her in regular time scale either as Sweeper or Scavenger as per the orders issued by the State Government and regularise her service from the date of her initial appointment. 3. According to the respondent, she was selected and appointed as Scavenger through Employment Exchange on consolidated pay on 03.09.1989. She is working as part-time Sweeper from the year 1989 in the Office of the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Mandapam Camp. 4. The first appellant passed G.O.(Ms)No.22, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F) Department, dated 28.02.2006, to regularise the service of the employees, who have completed 10 years of service as on 01.01.2006. The respondent is working as Sweeper and therefore, the ban imposed by ...
Thirumaran @ Saravanan Vs. Vasanthakumari
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act against the fair and decreetal order dated 26.10.2015 passed in R.C.A.No.3 of 2013 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Principal Subordinate Court), Cuddalore confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 08.04.2013 passed in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2008 on the file of the Rent Controller (Principal District Munsif Court), Cuddalore.) 1. The above Civil Revision Petition arises against the judgment and decree passed in R.C.A.No.3 of 2013 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority (Principal Subordinate Court), Cuddalore, confirming the order of eviction passed in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2008 on the file of the Rent Controller (Principal District Munsif Court), Cuddalore. 2. The tenant is the petitioner and the respondent is the landlady. 3. The respondent/landlady filed R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2008 for eviction on the ground of willful default, act of nuisance and sub-lett...
C. Murali Vs. State by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-16-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment, dated 18.08.2014 in S.C.No.19 of 2014 on the file of the Magalir Needhimandram, Fast Track Mahila Court, Tiruppur.) 1. This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgment dated 18.08.2014 in S.C.No.19 of 2014 on the file of the Magalir Needhimandram, Fast Track Mahila Court, Tiruppur, in and by which, the appellant/accused was convicted for the offence under Section 376(1) IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo one month simple imprisonment. The trial Court acquitted the appellant/accused of the charge under Section 366-A IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution leading to conviction of the appellant/accused is as follows: On 31.08.2010, P.W.3 victim girl, studying IX standard, left the house for school at about 8.30 a.m. and on her way to the school, near Kunnathur Bus Stand, the appellant/accused forcibly kidnapped P.W.3 in Omni Van ...