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.
Subham Traders, Salem Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Salem
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: These petitions are filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to calling for the records on the file of the respondent herein in TIN. No.33152723478/2012-13, dated 18.07.2016, and TIN. No. 33152723478/2013-14, dated 12.07.2016 and quash the same, while directing the respondent herein to consider the Petitions under section 84 of the Act dated 10.08.2016 and 23.07.2016, served on the respondent on 16.08.2016 and 26.07.2016 respectively.) Common Order 1. Heard Mr.N.Inbarajan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in both Writ Petitions and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate, accepting notice on behalf of respondent in both Writ Petitions. With the consent of the learned counsel on either side, these Writ Petitions are taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner has filed these Writ petitions challenging the orders dated 18.07.2016 and 12.07.2016 passed by the respondent and seeks for consequential direction to d...
P.R. Thangavelu Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax-III
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the Respondent to refund a sum of Rs.76,292/- being the difference between Rs.1,08,558/- paid by the Petitioner on 25.03.1999 as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court in W.M.P.No.7050 and 7053 of 1999 in W.P.No.4893 and 4894 of 1999 dated 24.03.1999 and Rs.32,266/- payable by the Petitioner under KVSS as per the revised Form 2A dated 21.09.2001 issued by the Respondent after giving effect to the Order of this Hon'ble Court dated 23.02.2001 in W.P.No.4893 and 4894 of 1999.) 1. Heard Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Rajasekar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Department. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks for a direction upon the respondent to refund a sum of Rs.76,292/- being the difference between Rs.1,08,558/- paid by the petitioner on 25.03.1999, as per the direction of this Court in W.M.P.Nos.7...
S. Sundari Vs. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandmaus to call for the records from the 2nd respondent pertaining to the impugned order Ka.No. U.MI.PO/E PE/ME/PA/KO. CASE/No. 054/2016 dated 25/26.05.2016, quash the same and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to provide electricity connection to the petitioner's premises at 6/176A, Om Shakthi Nagar, Thalapaiyanur, Thottipalayam Post, Bhavani, Erode District.) 1. This writ petition is filed for issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records from the 2nd respondent pertaining to the impugned order Ka.No. U.MI.PO/E PE/ME/PA/KO. CASE/No. 054/2016 dated 25/26.05.2016, quash the same and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to provide electricity connection to the petitioner's premises at 6/176A, Om Shakthi Nagar, Thalapaiyanur, Thottipalayam Post, Bhavani, Erode District. 2. For proper adjudication of the issue in question, this Court...
M/s. Steel Shoppe Rep.by its Authorised Signatory Vs. The Assistant Co ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in TIN No.33823364716/2014-15 dt:19/8/2015 and quash the same.) Common Order 1. Heard Mr.C.Natarajan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.C.Rekha Kumari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader (T) assisted by Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate (T) appearing for the respondent. 2. Since, the issue involved in all these writ petitions is identical, they were heard together and disposed of by way of this common order, with the consent of the learned counsel on either side. 3. The petitioner is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the TNVAT Act ) and the challenge in these writ petitions is to the assessment orders under the TNVAT Act as well as the Central Sa...
Thirugnanam and Others Vs. State Represented by Inspector of Police, S ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C to call for the records from the Lower Court and to duly set aside the Judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District in S.C.No.83 of 2006, dated 18.08.2015. This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 372 r/w 378(3) of Cr.P.C to set aside the Judgment and Conviction made in S.C.No.83 of 2006 dated 18.08.2015, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, by enhancing the sentence imposed on the accused persons and allow the above criminal appeal. (The provision of law amended as per order dated 27.01.2016 made in Crl.MP(MD)No.820 and 821 of 2016 in Crl.A(MD)No.SR.36089/2015)) M.V. Muralidaran, J. 1. The appellants are the accused in Crl.A(MD)No.199 of 2015 in S.C.No. 83 of 2006 on the file of the Principle Sessions Judge, Sivagangai. There were as many as 9 charges framed against the appellants/accused as detailed below. Charge Nos.AgainstOffence U/s.1A1 to A6148 IPC A7147 IP...
M/s. VBHC Chennai Value Homes Private Ltd., Kancheepuram District Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Common Prayer: This Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent in TIN No.33090889241/2013-14, TIN No.33090889241/2012-13 and TIN No.33090889241/2011-12 respectively and quash the order dated 31.07.2015, passed therein and further direct the respondent herein to complete the assessment for the assessment years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 along with the assessment for the assessment year 2014-15.) Common Order 1. The petitioner, in all these Writ Petition, is one and the same and the challenge is to the orders of assessment under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, (TNVAT Act), for the years 2013-14, 2012-13 and 2011-12 respectively. Since common issues arise for consideration, I have heard all the Writ Petitions together and they are disposed of by this common order. 2. Heard Mr.N.Venkataraman learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mrs.L.Murali Krishanan, learned ...
Kumaresan Vs. A. Kasi
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., to set aside the Judgment and Decree passed by the Subordinate Court, Sivagangai dated 03.09.2014 made in A.S.No.112 of 2012, by which confirming the Judgment and Decree passed by the District Munsif Court, Sivagangai made in O.S.No.62 of 2010 dated 10.09.2012 and allow the Second Appeal.) 1. The first defendant in the suit in O.S.No.62 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sivagangai, is the appellant in the above Second Appeal. 2. The respondent in this appeal filed a suit in O.S.No.62 of 2010 for declaration of title and injunction in respect of the suit property measuring an extent of 45 and cents in Survey No. 157/2 in Azhagichipatti Village, Sivagangai Taluk and Sivagangai District. The respondent has also prayed for setting aside the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.213 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sivagangai obtained by the first defendant against the second defendant. 3. Brief facts set out in ...
Selvarani Vs. Sundaresan
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-12-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to direct the Sub-Court, Pudukkottai to consider the memos, dated 17.4.2015, 01.09.2015 and memo received on 16.10.2015 submitted by the Petitioner in petition in H.M.O.P.No.18 of 2011, on the file of Sub-Judge, Pudukkottai and refer the same to the Mediation Centre or Lok Adalat for reaching an amicable settlement between the Petitioner and her husband.) 1. This revision has been filed seeking for a direction to the Sub-Court, Pudukkottai to consider the memos, dated 17.4.2015, 01.09.2015 and memo received on 16.10.2015 submitted by the Petitioner in petition in H.M.O.P.No.18 of 2011, on the file of Sub-Judge, Pudukkottai and refer the same to the Mediation Centre or Lok Adalat for reaching an amicable settlement between the Petitioner and her husband. 2. Pursuant to the order of this Court by order dated 6.6.2016, the matter has been referred to the Tamil Nadu Mediation and Concil...
GMS Motors Private Limited, New Delhi Vs. Nissan Motor India Private L ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Sections 433(e) and Section 434(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 1956 praying (a) that the respondent company, i.e., Nissan Motor India Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered address at Plot No.1A, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Mattur Post, Oragadam, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District, PIN Code - 602 105, be wound up by and under the orders and directions of this Court under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 ; and (b) the Official Liquidator of this Hon'ble Court be appointed Liquidator of the respondent Company with all powers under Section 457 of the Companies Act, 1956 to take charge of the assets, business affairs, properties, bank accounts, books of account vouchers, documents, etc., of the respondent company with all powers under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.) 1. This is a petition, effectively, filed under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 (in short the 1956 Act ). 2. The...
A.S. Suresh Kumar and Others Vs. The Registrar, Central Administrative ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records of the first respondent made in O.A.No.908 of 2011, vide order, dated 03.11.2014 and quash the same and consequently, direct the official respondents to grant the revised pay to the applicants by fixing the grade pay from the date on which the said benefit was extended to their Juniors and to disburse the accrued arrears within a reasonable time frame.) P. Kalaiyarasan, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Madras Bench), dated 03.11.2014 in O.A.No.908 of 2011 and consequently, direct the official respondents to grant the revised pay to the petitioners by extending the benefit of the MACP Scheme. 2. The facts of the case in nutshell are as follows : (i) The petitioners ...