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.
O. Meenakshi Vs. State rep by Inspector of Police, CBI/ACB, Shastri Bh ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer:Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code r/w Section 17 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, against the order dated 28.04.2015 made in Cr.M.P.No.319 of 2015 in Spl.C.C.No.3 of 2014 passed by the learned Special Judge (under the Prevention of Corruption Act), Puducherry.) 1. This Revision has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 28.04.2015 in Cr.M.P.No.319 of 2015 in Spl.C.C.No.3 of 2014 passed by the learned Special Judge (under the Prevention of Corruption Act), Puducherry, in and by which the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. seeking to discharge him from the said case was dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are as follows_ 2-1. The petitioner has been arrayed as 2nd accused in the case. She is the Proprietrix of one M/s.ATOZ Life Sciences, a drug manufacturing unit. The 1st accused - P.Rajakumaran was the Licencing Authority-cum-Controlling Au...
Prakasam and Others Vs. State Represented by the Inspector of Police V ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer: Appeals are filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli, in S.C.No.63 of 2014 dated 10.07.2015.) Common Judgment: S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellants in both the appeals are the accused 1 to 4 in S.C.No.63/2014 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli. They stood charged for the offences under Sections 341, 302 r/w 34 IPC. By judgment, dated 10.07.2015, the trial Court convicted the accused under the both the charges and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each for offence under Section 341 IPC. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants are before this Court with these appeals. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: The deceased in...
Rajesh Mathew Vs. Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, Depart ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
1. Applicant is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in not considering his request for appointment on compassionate grounds. He states that his father Shri C.G. Mathukutty, an ex-serviceman who lost one leg in combat while serving in the Indian Army after getting relieved from the Army, joined as Postal Assistant in 1973. He died while in service on 12.6.1997 leaving behind his wife and the applicant, his son. The family of the widow consists of the applicant, his wife and two minor children. According to him, though he had applied for appointment on compassionate grounds immediately after the death of his father no action was taken by the respondents. The mother of the applicant again submitted an application for compassionate appointment in 1999 a copy of which is produced as Annexure A1. As per the instructions of the officials of the Postal Division, a formal request in the proforma also was submitted vide Annexure A2. Again no steps were taken by the responden...
Kunchammal and Another Vs. M. Jagannathan
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Arrears of Rent(Relief) Act(38 of 90) r/w Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code praying this Court to set aside the finding of the Revenue Divisional Authority, Kumbakonam made in P.T.No.540/92(418/91), dated 30.4.1993 as illegal, erroneous, against law and without jurisdiction.) 1. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 28.9.2016, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioners 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 Petitioners. 2. In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs....
Priya Vs. Krish
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 r/w Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code praying this Court to withdraw the case in H.M.O.P.No.6 of 2015, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Palani Camp at Kodaikanal and transfer the same to the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam.) 1. This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed praying this Court to withdraw the case in H.M.O.P.No.6 of 2015, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Palani Camp at Kodaikanal and transfer the same to the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam. 2. The respondent herein/husband has filed H.M.O.P.No.6 of 2015 before the Sub-Court, Palani Camp at Kodaikanal. The marriage between the Petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 24.6.2005 at Oddanchatram according to Hindu rites and customs. Due to difference of opinion, the Petitioner is now residing with her parents at Thiruvidaimaruthur, Thanjavur District. The allega...
Sri Venkateswara Service Station a registered Firm by its Managing Par ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the respondents viz., the order of termination of dealership dated 16.10.2015 issued vide ref. No.CHTR.41.49 issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same and direct the resumption of sales and supplies of the petroleum products to the petitioner's outlet at No.265/1, CP Manali Express Highway Road, Sathangadu, Manili, Chennai - 600 068 in accordance with Dealership Agreement dated 01.11.1995.) 1. The above Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records viz., the order of termination of dealership dated 16.10.2015 issued by the 1st respondent and to quash the same and direct the resumption of sales and supplies of the petroleum products to the petitioner's outlet in accordance with Dealership Agreement dated 01.11.1995. 2. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order of te...
Daon Auto Parts (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Assistant Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the on the files of the respondent-herein in TIN:33701665051 dated 24.08.2016, quashing the same in so far as it relates to the assessment dated 25.02.2016 and accept the Industrial Input Certificates as contemplated by Rule 6(3)(b), filed by the petitioners on 18.04.2016, along with their application dated 12.04.2016 and as reiterated on 30.05.2016.) 1. Heard Mr.N.SriPrakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing for the respondents. Since the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions lies in a very narrow compass, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side, the Writ Petitions are taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner-Company, is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Val...
K. Gopi Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Secretary to Governmen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records relating to G.O. Ms. No.168, Labour and Employment (Q-1) Department dated 19.10.2000 from the file of the first respondent, quash the same in so far as it relates to restricting the age of the Government Servant retiring on medical grounds to 53 years as a pre-requisite to consider his legal representatives for employment on compassionate grounds and also quash the consequential proceedings in Na.Ka.No.3/49261/2006 dated 01.03.2007 on the file of the second respondent and further direct the respondents 1 and 3 to appoint the petitioner as Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds, consequent upon the retirement of the father of the petitioner on the ground of medical invalidation, within the time frame which this Court may be pleased to stipulate.) 1. The petitioner calls in question the order passed by the Government in G....
B. Vijayakrishnan Vs. The Special Commissioner and Commissioner Of Lan ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer:Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent vide Proceedings Ref.K1/17100/2008, dated 10.02.2009, quash the same.) 1. Challenging the impugned order of the respondent, dated 10.02.2009, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. The case of the Petitioner is that an extent of 0.95.0 hectares of Punja land in Survey No.51/2 in Poovanthi Village, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District originally belonged to the Sivagangai Zamindar Mr.Shanmugaraja and the land was registered as Sivagangai Raja Chatram in settlement A Register. By virtue of an oral assignment by the Sivagangai Zamindar,. the Petitioner grandfather became the owner of the said property and the ownership and title is never disputed by the members belong to the Zamindar family till Petitioner s grandfather s time. However the Petitioner s grandfather had not applied for patta before the Settle...
M/s. Fraulin, Partnership Firm, rep by its Partner J. Sumitha, Chennai ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-29-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 25 of the Tamil nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1960 against the fair and decreetal order dated 09.09.2015 passed in R.C.A.Nos.41 of 2014 and 456 of 2014 on the file of the VII Small Causes Court, Chennai confirming/reversing the fair and decreetal order passed in R.C.O.P.No.1581 of 2012 on the file of the XVI Small Causes Court, Chennai.) Common Order 1. C.R.P(NPD).No.4291 of 2015 arises against the judgment and decree passed in R.C.A.No.41 of 2014 on the file of the VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai confirming the order of eviction passed in R.C.O.P.No.1581 of 2012 on the file of the XVI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in respect of the property, which is a residential portion. 2. Challenging the order of eviction passed in R.C.A.No.456 of 2014 on the file of the VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, reversing the order passed in R.C.O.P.No.1581 of 2012 on the file of the XVI Judge, Court of Small Ca...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »