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.
Venkataramana Holdings Private Limited Vs. Pricol Holdings Limited
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 to sanction the Scheme of Amalgamation.) Common Order 1. This company petition is preferred under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 for sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation of the transferor company with the transferee company with effect from 01.04.2015. The scheme of amalgamation (in short the scheme) is appended as Annexure '6' to the petition. 2. M/s.Venkataramana Holdings Private Limited is the transferor company and M/s.Pricol Holdings Limited is the transferee company. 2.1. For the sake of convenience, the transferor company and the transferee company will be collectively referred to as companies. 2.2. To be noted, in paragraph No.5 of the petition, it is stated that the transferor company is a wholly owned subsidiary of the transferee company and therefore, in view of the judgment in the case of Mahamba Investments Vs. IDI Limited reported in 2001 (105) Comp Cases 16, no separate petitio...
M/s. Bentool Steel Products P Ltd., Chennai Vs. The State of Tamil Nad ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent in the impugned order in CST/1644/2014-2015, dated 28.07.2016 quash the same as illegal and further direct the second respondent to pass revision order allowing the ITC on interstate sale done to SEZ against Form-1.) 1. Heard Mr.R.Sridhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate, accepting notice on behalf of respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel on either side, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner is a dealer of Alloys, Mild Steel, Carbon Rounds, Steel Sheets, Steel Plates, Steel Pipes, Steel Structural and Copper Flats and has effected sale to a company viz., Sri City SEZ in Andhra Pradesh. The said purchasers have used the same in the production and export of Heavy duty Transformers, Industrial Tanks, Power ...
Venkatachalapathy and Others Vs. The Inspector of Police, CBCID police ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C to call for the records of the case in Cr.No.14 of 2016, on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same.) 1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records of the case in Cr.No.14 of 2016, on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. 3. The facts in this case have already been discussed in detail by this Court while deciding Crl.O.P.Nos.15150 of 2015 and 30486 of 2015 on 04.07.2016, which reads as under: ..........Crl.O.P.No.15150 of 2015 has been filed to direct the respondent police to register the petitioner's complaint dated 03.01.2015 and Crl.O.P.No.30486 of 2015 has been filed to direct the respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 09.10.2015. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by thei...
S. Abdul Muthaliff Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Home Secre ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.3 to transfer the case in Crime No.433 of 2010 U/s. 306 IPC dated 16.09.2010 on the file of Respondent No.6 and entrust the same to the Respondent No.4 for investigation of the case by a competent officer and file a final report before the Judicial Magistrate within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the writ petition has become infructuous. 2. Recording the abovesaid statement, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed....
M. Pandi Vs. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Madurai
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order, dated 28.08.2012, made in W.P.(MD) No.10499 of 2012.) M. Sathyanarayanan, J. 1. The appellant is the son of Late.Muniyandi, who was employed as an Office Assistant in the Office of the Sales Officer, Madurai District Central Cooperative Bank, which comes under the control of the respondent herein and died on harness on 01.10.2001, leaving behind the legal heirs viz., the appellant, his mother, paternal grandmother, two sisters and one brother. Appellant's mother obtained a Legal Heirship Certificate from the office of the Tahsildar, Tirumangalam, on 15.10.2001, which would indicate that his mother Angammal was aged about 38 years and he was aged about 16 years at the relevant point of time. According to the appellant, he belongs to Scheduled Caste Community and though his father died on 01.10.2001, application for compassionate ground appointment could not be sent immediately for the reasons that he wa...
Jagan Vs. The State Rep.by: Inspector of Police Vaduvoor Police Statio ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: CRIMINAL APPEAL filed under section 374 of Cr. P.C. against the Judgment dated 27.2.2013 passed in S.C.No.82 of 2011 on the file of District and Sessions Court, Thiruvarur.) A. Selvam, J. 1. This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the convictions and sentences passed in Sessions Case No.82 of 2011 by the District and Sessions Court, Thiruvarur. 2. The case of the prosecution is that in the year 2008, the accused, by name Jagan has done some masonry work in the house of the deceased Shanmugam. The deceased Shanmugam has worn two Gold rings. On 23.10.2009, in between 3 a.m., and 6 a.m., the accused has stealthily entered into the house of the deceased and murdered him and subsequently removed the Gold rings. After occurrence, the son of the deceased, by name Aruldoss (P.W.1) has given a complaint to the Sub Inspector of Police (P.W.11) and the same has been registered in Crime No.246 of 2009 under section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 3. On 12.2.2011, the a...
Somasekharan Nair Vs. The District Collector, Nagercoil Post, Kanyakum ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
M.V. Muralidaran, J. 1. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition as Public Interest Litigation seeking a prayer for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 6 to close and seal the illegal road construction materials processing unit run by the respondents 7 to 10 in accordance with law. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is resident of Edassery, Ramavarmanchirai, Ramavarmanchirai Post, Kanyakumari District, which is very near to the subject matter godown, which is in control of respondents 7 to 10 and hence, the residents in the locality are the most affected victims of their whimsical acts. The petitioner further stated that almost all persons, who are residing in the locality, are highly disturbed and affected due to the heavy air pollution and nuisance caused by the respondents 7 to 10. Due to the fear many of them do not dare to make any complaints against them. Hence, the petitioner filed the above writ petition as Public Interested Li...
P. Malles Vs. The State rep by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Sal ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in C.C.No.87/14 on the file of Judicial Magistrate-II, Mettur and quash the same as illegal insofar as the petitioner/A9 is concerned.) RESERVED ON PRONOUNCED ON 1. This petition has been filed to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in C.C.No.87/14 on the file of Judicial Magistrate-II, Mettur and quash the same as illegal insofar as the petitioner/A9 is concerned. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. It is common knowledge that Co-operative Societies breed less co-operation, but more corruption and are fertile grounds for misappropriation. The subject Society in this case is K.K.128, Mettur Factory Employees Co-operative Housing Society. It came to the notice of the higher ups in the Department that there has been planned siphoning of the funds from the said Society...
G.A. Sridhar Vs. The Union of India, rep. by the General Manager, Sout ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Sections 14 and 15 read with Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to terminate the mandate of the present Arbitral Tribunal (comprising of the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Respondents) and appoint an independent Arbitrator to arbitrate all the disputes and claims arising out of the Agreement No.17/Dy.CE/CN/MAS/06 dt. 18.05.2006.) 1. The respondent-Southern Railway called for a tender for the work in Chennai-Gudur Section as part of Third Line between Korukkupet and Athipattu Stations. 2. The petitioner submitted the tender, which was accepted by the respondent-Southern Railway vide Letter of Acceptance dated 15.12.2005 and subsequently, an agreement was executed on 18.05.2006 for the value of the contract at Rs.4,11,70,610/-. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the contract was delayed and frustrated due to various factors. But on the other hand, the Contract Operating Authority, treated it as contract mismanagement by the petitioner a...
Hemamalini Vs. C.M. Suresh
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-09-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 06.07.2009 passed in MC.No.4 of 2008 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vellore.) 1. This Criminal Revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vellore made in MC.No.4 of 2008 dated 06.07.2009, dismissing the maintenance application filed by the revision petitioner. 2. It is admitted by both sides that the revision petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent. The said marriage was held on 24.01.1999 at Sri Ragavendra Kalyana Mandapam, Vellore according to Hindu rites and customs. Since, the marriage is admitted, the respondent/husband is liable to maintain her wife. The wife filed divorce petition, the same was dismissed, after dismissal of the divorce petition, the present maintenance petition was filed, the trial Court ought to have noted the dowry harassment and divorce, are the sufficient cause for claiming mainten...
- ‹ Prev
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- Next ›
- Last »