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.
D. Sathiyan Vs. The Chief Educational Officer, Thiruvarur District, Th ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent herein to consider and pass orders on the petitioners representation dated 11.04.2016 on merits and in accordance with law with a reasonable time as may be fixed by this Court.) 1. D. Sathiyan, who is working as a Driver in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, has come to this Court seeking issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent/Chief Educational Officer, Thiruvarur District, Thiruvarur to consider his representation dated 07.04.2016 and to take action against one Bala Nagammal, who is working as a Teacher in Pudur Government Higher Secondary School, near Tirunellikaval, Thiruvarur District and also her brother, namely, Suresh for the reason that the said Bala Nagammal said to have borrowed Rs.5,00,000/- to secure the present teaching post in the Government School and her brother Suresh also borrowed Rs.2,00,000/- for gettin...
Carol Garments and Another Vs. The Joint Director General of Foreign T ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayers: for W.P.No.13992 of 2016 Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd Respondent to refund the sum of Rs.7,00,000/- along with interest towards EPCG licence no.3230000368, dated 11.10.2000. W.P.No.13993 of 2016: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to implement the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) passed vide C3/694/O/2011 dated 28.03.2013 and thereby order refund of an amount of Rs.4,77,500/- along with interest towards EPCG licence no.3230000625, dated 21.03.2001.) Common Order 1. Heard both sides. 2. The Prayer in W.P.No.13992 of 2016 is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd Respondent to refund the sum of Rs.7,00,000/- along with interest towards EPCG licence no.3230000368, dated 11.10.2000. 3. The Prayer in W.P.No.13993 of 2016 is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd and 3rd res...
S. Siva and Another Vs. Arulmigu Nagareeswarar Temple and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to allow this Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the fair and decreetal order in I.A.No.1439 of 2007 in O.S.No.1231 of 1996 dated 07.02.2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kancheepuram.) 1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the fair and decretal order in I.A.No.1439 of 2007 in O.S.No.1231 of 1996 dated 07.02.2008 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kancheepuram. 2. The respondents herein/plaintiffs filed a suit in O.S.No.1231 of 1996, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kancheepuram, praying to direct the defendants to vacate and handover the possession of the scheduled mentioned premises; to pay the arrears of rent for a sum of Rs.900/- to the respondents for the past three years; to pay a sum of Rs.650/- towards past damages for use and occupation of the premises and cost of the suit. On 25.11.1996, the plaintiffs wer...
Tamilmani and Others Vs. State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Arantha ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Common Prayer: Petitions filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records relating to the FIRs in Crime Nos.278 and 106 of 2016 pending on the file of the respective 1st respondent and to quash the same as illegal.) 1. Section 482 Cr.P.C., saves inherent power of the Court. Such inherent power can be exercised either to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Invoking such inherent power, this petition has been filed to quash the proceedings on the ground that the continuance would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. 2. Acase in Crime No.278 of 2016 has been registered under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) IPC by the 1st respondent against the petitioners in Crl.O.P.(MD)16421 of 2016. As a counter blast, on the basis of the complaint given by the wife of the 1st petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD)16421 of 2016, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.106 of 2016 for offences under Sections 352 a...
S. Raj Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporati ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay the retirement benefits with interest to the petitioner in view of the representation dated 05.08.2016.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondents Transport Corporation. Seeking his retirement benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the issue is covered by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, dated 12.06.2015. He has further submitted that the respondents would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Honourable Division Bench. 3. For ready reference, the judgment, dated 12.06.2015, passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, is extracted hereunder: "The learned Additional Advocate General submit...
N. Shanmugam Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Cor ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay the retirement benefits payable to the petitioner with reasonable interest rate within the time-frame that may be stipulated by this Court.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondents Transport Corporation. Seeking his retirement benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the issue is covered by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, dated 12.06.2015. He has further submitted that the respondents would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Honourable Division Bench. 3. For ready reference, the judgment, dated 12.06.2015, passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, is extracted hereunder: "The learne...
P. Rajavelu and Another Vs. Udayapriya and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Sankagiri, Salem District dated 27.6.2011 in I.A.No.359 of 2008 in O.S.No.17 of 2006.) 1. Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.359 of 2008 in O.S.No.17 of 2006, on the file of Subordinate Court, Sankagiri, the defendants 2 and 3 have filed the above Civil Revision Petition. 2. The plaintiffs filed a suit in O.S.No.17 of 2006 for partition, separate possession and for injunction. After contest, the trial Court passed a preliminary decree, allotting 5/12 share to the plaintiffs. The trial Court also restrained the defendants 1 to 3 from putting up any construction in the suit property. 3. Subsequent to the passing of preliminary decree, the plaintiffs filed Final Decree application in I.A.No.187/2007 and in the Final Decree application, the defendants 2 and 3 have filed an application in I.A.No.359 of 2008, stating that as per Sec.43 of...
S. Palaniappan Vs. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Rep. by its Chair ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to promote him as Foreman Grade-I with effect from 30.03.1998, the date on which his junior A.Periannan, the 3rd respondent herein was promoted and pay him arrears thereof and consequently, promoting him to the post of Foreman Special Grade in the vacancy to be caused due to the retirement of M. Asokhan by fixing his seniority above the 3rd respondent.) 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to promote him as Foreman Grade-I with effect from 30.03.1998, the date on which his junior A.Periannan, the 3rd respondent herein was promoted and pay him arrears thereof and consequently, promoting him to the post of Foreman Special Grade in the vacancy to be caused due to the retirement of M. Asokhan by fixing his seniority above the 3rd responde...
M. Varadhan Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed to transfer the investigation in Crime No.513 of 2012 on complaint dated 30.07.2012 pending on the file of the 4th respondent to CBCID, Chennai.) 1. The petitioner purchased 2168 sq ft vacant land from one Mr.Srinivasan, as early as in 1978 and the property is situated at No.3, Govindasamy Street, Mathialagan Nagar, Saligramam, Chennai-600 093. 2. On 29.04.2010, the petitioner executed settlement deed in respect of the above property to his 3 daughters. When things stand so, in 2010, some strangers approached the petitioner to purchase the petitioner's land and sought documents and the petitioner responded that he is not interested in selling the property. Thereafter, the petitioner faced threat from some goondas. 3. In order to grab the properties from the petitioner, based on a release deed, alleged to have been given by the legal heirs of the petitioner's vendor, one Umapathy given Power of Attorney to Ragupathy, on 11.11.2009. It also came to the knowledge o...
Musthafa @ Mohammed Musthafa and Others Vs. The State Rep. by The Depu ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records pertaining to Spl.S.C.No.37 of 2016 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147 and 323 IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act r/w Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act r/w Section 149 IPC pending before the III Additional District and Sessions Court (PCR), Madurai filed by the respondent / complainant and quash the same with regard to the petitioners.) 1. Section 482 Cr.P.C., saves inherent power of the Court. Such inherent power can be exercised either to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Invoking such inherent power, this petition has been filed to quash the proceedings on the ground that the continuance would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. 2. Acase in Crime No.164 of 2011 has been registered under Sections 147 and 323 IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act r/w Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act r/w Section 149 IPCby the 1st respondent aga...