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.
Ashok Kumar Vs. The District Vigilance Committee for Verification of C ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records in proceedings No.Na.Ka.J1.44815/08, dated 20.08.2009, passed by the first respondent and quash the same.) M. Sathyanarayan, J. 1. The petitioner would claim that he belongs to Hindu Pallan Community, since it is included in the list of Scheduled Caste Community. The petitioner joined the fourth respondent College in the year 2004 and completed his Bachelor Degree in Engineering (Mechanical Engineering) course in the year 2008 and he got seat in the fourth respondent College based on the Hindu Scheduled Caste Community status. 2. The petitioner would further state that he was also issued with Community Certificate No.1053556, dated 21.06.1997, by the Tahsildar, Virudhunagar, stating that he belongs to Hindu Pallan Scheduled Caste Community. It is stated by the petitioner that his father was professed as Christian and got himself converted to Hindu...
Vanitha Vs. State by, The Inspector of Police, Cuddalore District
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 23.3.2016 passed in S.C.No.287 of 2014 on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Court, Chidambaram.) A. Selvam, J. 1. Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to the conviction and sentence dated 23.03.2016 passed in Sessions Case No.287 of 2014 by the Additional District and Sessions Court, Chidambaram. 2. The case of the prosecution is that at the time of occurrence, the deceased, viz., Ganesan has served as Sub Inspector of Police in Annamalai Nagar Police Station. During tenure of his service, the accused, by name, Vanitha has had acquaintance with him and with an intention to marry the deceased, she divorced her husband and very often both of them have used to live as husband and wife in the house of the deceased. On 9.7.2014, the deceased has married one Sathya. After knowing the factum of marriage, with an intention to murder the deceased, on 21.7.2014, the accused has come to the house ...
Minor M. Balaji Vs. S. Venkatachalam and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer: Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 27.12.2010 made in M.C.O.P.Nos.206, 207 and 209 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court/Fast Track Court No.1, Erode.) 1. These three appeals have been filed by the appellants/claimants, being the members of the same family, namely, husband, wife and minor son, challenging the common award passed in M.C.O.P.Nos.207, 209 and 206 of 2008 respectively dated 27.12.2010 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Fast Track Court No.1, Erode restricting the compensation payable to them at 50% on the ground of contributory negligence. 2. Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel for the appellants, assailing the impugned common award, pointed out the following infirmities committed by the Tribunal:- i. The fixing of contributory negligence on the part of the appellants/claimants at 50%, m...
United India Insurance Co., Ltd. and Others Vs. Yasoda and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer in C.M.A.No.1249 of 2016 : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the Award and Decree, dated 17.08.2015 made in M.C.O.P.No.724 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (VI Court of Small Causes), Chennai. Cross Objection filed under Order 41, Rule 22 of the CPC, against the Award and Decree, dated 17.08.2015 made in M.C.O.P.No.724 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (VI Court of Small Causes), Chennai.) Common Judgment P. Kalaiyarasan, J 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and Cross Objection are directed against the Award, dated 17.08.2015 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chennai in M.C.O.P.No.724 of 2012. Insurance company filed the appeal challenging the quantum and Cross Objection has been filed by the claimants for enhancement of the Award. 2. The parents of the deceased are claimants. R.Govarthanam, while riding the two wheeler at 7 p.m on 28.09.2006 on the National Highways ...
P. Panchali Vs. The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribu ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Ka.No: Se.Po/KiKo/UNiA/NiPi/Nir.U.1/A.No.745/2016 dated 05.05.2016 passed by the 3rd respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to disburse 50% of terminal benefits of the deceased P.Sivalingam to the petitioner.) 1. Whether nominee is a legatee or a trustee in respect of terminal benefits of the deceased is the issue raised in this case. The contention of the department is that nominee is the owner of the property and therefore, nominee alone is entitled to get the benefit. But the contention of the petitioner is that nominee is not the owner of the asset and unless the statute expressly provides that the provisions of law will override Succession Laws, it is the legal heirs, who would be entitled to terminal benefits and not the nominee alone. Whose contention is right? is ...
M. Maheswaran Vs. R.S. Niranjana
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, praying this Court to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.448 of 2016, pending on the file of the Family Court, Coimbatore and to transfer the same to the file of Family Court, Dindigul. 1. The learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to not press this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition and has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the same, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed as not pressed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs....
J. Ganapatha and Others Vs. M/s. N. Selvarajalou Chetty Trust and Othe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer: Original Side Appeal preferred under Clause 15 of Letters Patent read with Order XXXVI Rule 2 of Original Side Rules against the order of this Court dated 18-09-2006 made in C.S.No.504 of 1998.) A. Selvam, J. 1. This Original Side Appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 18-09-2006 passed in C.S.No.504 of 1998 by the learned Single Judge of this Court. 2. The first respondent herein, as plaintiff, has instituted C.S.No.504 of 1998 on the file of this Court praying for the reliefs of declaration, permanent injunction and also for vacant possession of the suit property wherein the present appellants and the remaining respondents have been arrayed as defendants . 3. The averments made in the plaint are that one Mrs. Padmini Chandrasekaran has purchased the suit property by virtue of a sale deed dated 26-09-1963 executed by the Advocate Commissioner in pursuance of Court-auction sale. After purchase, she has become absolute owner of the same. During her life ...
The Branch Manager, M/s. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree, dated 30.11.2015 made in M.C.O.P.No.760 of 2013, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Court), Perambalur.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Arising out of an accident, which occurred on 26.04.2013, there were several claims and they were jointly heard. 2. Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 30.11.2015 made in M.C.O.P.No.760 of 2013, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Court), Perambalur, by which, the Tribunal, after fixing negligence on the driver of the Eicher Maxi Cab, bearing Registration No.TN 20 BS 7979, insured with the appellant-Insurance Company, awarded compensation of Rs.26,12,000/-, with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of claim, till the date of realisation. 3. Before this Court, the appellant-Insurance Company has not challenged the finding, fixing negligence...
M/s. Ganesh Chemicals Vs. Navaneethan and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-08-2016
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C., against the order of acquittal passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai in C.C.No.87 of 1999 dated 02.12.2003.) 1. The Learned counsel for the Appellant informs this Court that the matter was settled between the parties and hence, prays for withdrawal of the present Criminal Appeal and also to the aforesaid effect, a letter dated 07.09.2016 was addressed to the Assistant Registrar (Crl. Side) of High Court, Madras. 2. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the present Criminal Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn....
Ramajayam Vs. The Secretary to the Government, Department of Consumer ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-07-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus calling for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the third respondent dated 15.3.2016 in D.No.20 of 2016, against the petitioner Ramajayam, Male aged 40 years, S/o.Mookkaiya Nadar, who is confined at Central Prison, Vellore and set aside the same and direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty.) A. Selvam, J. 1. This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for the records relating to detention order, dated 15.3.2016, passed in D.No.20 of 2016, by the detaining authority, who has been arrayed as the third respondent herein, against the detenu, by name Ramajayam, Son of Mookkaiya Nadar, and quash the same. 2. The Inspector of Police, Civil Supplies CID, Kancheepuram Unit, as sponsoring authority, has submitted an affidavit to the detaining authority...