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.
Sundarajan Vs. Dr.K. Chandrasekaran and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the Fair and Decreetal order dated 01.07.2013 made in I.A.No.122 of 2013 in O.S.No.3 of 2010 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Chidambaram.) 1. Heard Mr.R.Bharathkumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner and Mr.K.S.Madhavan, learned Counsel appearing for the first Respondent. 2. The challenge in the present Civil Revision Petition is to the Order passed by the Principal District Munsif, Chidambaram in I.A.No.122 of 2013 in O.S.No.3 of 2010 dated 01.07.2013. The Suit was filed by the first Respondent for declaration of title to the Suit Property and for removal of super structure put up in the Suit property and other consequential reliefs. 3. The Petitioner has filed the above Interim Application under Order VIII Rule 9 of CPC before the Court for receiving additional written statement which according to the Petitioner was necessitated for placing the material an...
Thilagaraj Vs. Dharmaraj and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Judgment and conviction dated 06.08.2013 made in S.C.No.74 of 2013 on the file of the Sessions Court, Trichy.) S. Nagamuthu, J 1. This is an appeal against acquittal of the respondent Nos.1 to 4, who are the accused in S.C.No.74 of 2013, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Trichirappalli. The respondent Nos.1 to 4 stood charged, as detailed below. ChargeAccusedPenal Provisions11 to 4120-B IPC22 and 3364IPC32 to 4302 IPC41302 r/w 34 IPC 2. By Judgment dated 06.08.2013, the Trial Court acquitted the respondent Nos.1 to 4 from all the charges. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant, who is the father of the deceased, has come up with this Criminal Appeal.3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:- The deceased, in this case, was one Mr.Ranjith. PW-1 is his father and PW-2 is his brother. They were all residing at Thuraiyur in Trichirappalli District. The first accused - ...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
M. Venugopal, J. 1. The Applicant/1st Respondent has preferred the instant Original Application praying for passing of an order to issue subpoena to Mr.N.K.Bansal, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12 (1), Central Revenue Building, IP Estate, New Delhi-110 002 to produce the records and tender evidence relating to the current status of the investigation into seizure of Rs.1,18,00,000/- cash from the vehicle belonging to G4S cash Solutions (I) Pvt. Ltd. on 12.04.2011 during the Assembly Election of Kolathur Assembly Constituency of Tamil Nadu held in the year 2011. 2. According to the Learned Counsel for the Applicant/1st Respondent, the Respondent/Election Petitioner has alleged corrupt practice against the Applicant/1st Respondent (in Election Petition No.1 of 2011) for the Assembly Election held in the year 2011. Further, it is represented on behalf of the Applicant that the 1st Respondent/Election Petitioner had marked Ex.P.31 - Reply from the Deputy Commissioner of Income T...
Dr.T. Rajasekaran Vs. The Protection Officer, Domestic Violence Act, D ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 18.03.2016 made in Crl.MP.No.1336 of 2016 in CC.No.2463 of 2015 passed by the learned 10th Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai.) 1. The Criminal revision is directed against the order passed by the learned 10th Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai made in Crl.MP.No.1336 of 2016 in CC.No.2463 of 2015 dated 18.03.2016, dismissing the discharge application filed under Section 238 Cr.PC. 2. It is admitted by both sides, CC.No.2463 of 2015 is pending on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai for the offences under Section 9(b) read with 37(2)(e) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would mainly contend that the trial Court without appreciating the facts erroneously dismissed the discharge application filed by the revision petitioner. In this case, the plea...
R. Saravanan Vs. Komala
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr. P.C. to set aside the order dated 19.03.2014 made in CMP.No.160 of 2013 in MC.No.12 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Thiruvallur.) 1. The Criminal revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Thriuvallur made in CMP.No.160 of 2013 in MC.No.12 of 2008 dated 19.03.2014. 2. It is admitted by both sides, the respondent herein filed maintenance petition in MC.No.12 of 2008 before the Judicial Magistrate No. II, Tiruvallur. After trial, the Judicial Magistrate directed the revision petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-p.m. from the date of petition and Rs.15,000/-p.a. towards medical expenses. Thereafter, the respondent filed HMOP.No.57 of 2009 for restitution of conjugal rights against the present revision petitioner, the respondent has not come forward to live with the revision petitioner. Hence, the revision petitioner filed the CMP.No.160 of...
Chinnakkannu @ Chinnakannan Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, in S.C.No.389 of 2007 dated 26.03.2014.) S. Nagamuthu, J 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.389/2007 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli. He stood charged for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 449 and 302 IPC. By judgment dated 26.03.2014. The trial Court convicted him under both charges and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 449 IPC. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution is as f...
M/s. K.M. Knitwear, Tirupur Vs. Customs and Central Excise Settlement ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the first respondent, culminating in the Order No.VIII/10/84 to 88, 93 to 95/2003-SC Final Order No.50/Cus/2004, dated 19.11.2004 and quash the same, in so far as it relates to deemed of additional duty of 24% instead of 16% as per the Notification No.21/2002.) Common Order: 1. The petitioner, in all these Writ Petitions, has challenged the order passed by the Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission, Additional Bench, Chennai (Settlement Commission), dated 19.11.2004. Though there are nine Writ Petitions in this batch of cases, all Writ Petitions question the common order passed by the Settlement Commission, dated 19.11.2004. The facts which are necessary for the disposal of the Writ Petitions are as follows:- The petitioners filed individual applications for settlement of the proceedings initiated pursuant to show cause notices is...
The District Elementary Educational Officer, Karur District, Karur and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer :Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order, dated 10.03.2016, made in W.P.(MD) No.20615 of 2015.) Common Judgment M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. These Writ Appeals are filed by the third respondent as well as the Official respondents 1 and 2, aggrieved by the order dated 10.03.2016 made in W.P.(MD)No.20615 of 2015. Hence, both the Writ Appeals are disposed of by this common judgment. 2. This Court, for the sake convenience, is adopting the array of parties as in the impugned order passed in W.P.(MD)No.20615 of 2015, dated 10.03.2016. 3. The facts lead to the filing of these Writ Appeals briefly narrated are as follows: 3.1. The Writ Petitioner herein filed the said Writ Petition praying for quashment of the order of the first respondent dated 09.11.2015, in and by which, he has been reverted from the post of Elementary School Head Master, Sengalivalasu, Aravakurichi Union, Karur District to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher at Panchayat Union Middl...
J. Sam Christopher Durai Singh Vs. P. Catherine Beaula
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the docket order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar at Srivilliputhur in D.O.P.SR.No.1188 of 2016 on 26.7.2016 and praying for a direction to number the same and to take the case for hearing on merits.) 1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the docket order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar at Srivilliputhur in D.O.P.SR.No.1188 of 2016 on 26.07.2016 and praying for a direction to number the same and to take the case for hearing, on merits. 2. The Petitioner has filed the Original D.O.P.SR.No.1188 of 2016 under Section 19(1)(x) of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 and the learned Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar at Srivilliputhur has assigned D.O.P.SR.No.1188 of 2016 to the above said case. On scrutiny, the said case was returned, pointing out the following defects: Returned: 1. Section of law to be correctly mentioned? 2. How ...
M/s. Doosan Infracore India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for records of the first respondent, in G.D.No.1155/2016-17, dated 26.08.2016, and to quash the same as arbitrary, without jurisdiction being ultravires to the statutory provisions of the Tamil Nadu Added Tax Act, 2006.) 1. Heard Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate, accepting notice on behalf of respondents. With consent on either side, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2. The order, impugned in this Writ Petition is a compounding notice, issued by the first respondent, dated 26.08.2016. This notice is pursuant to a vehicular check, carried at Thiruchitrambalam, on 24.08.2016, at 5.30 p.m. where, the Vehicle bearing No. PY 01 AG 3669, carrying two excavators, was checked to ascertain as to whether proper documents are accompanying the movements of the goods from Pulichappall...