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.
R. Kaleeswaran Vs. R. Samundeeswaran and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the Fair and Decreetal Order of dismissal dated 26.11.2013 passed in I.A.No.3522 of 2013 in O.S.No.6549 of 1996 on the file of VIII Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) 1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the Fair and Decreetal Order of dismissal dated 26.11.2013 passed in I.A.No.3522 of 2013 in O.S.No.6549 of 1996 on the file of VIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The Civil Revision Petitioner who is a third party to the suit in O.S.No.6549 of 1996 on the file of VIII Assistant City Civil Judge at Chennai filed an application in I.A.No.3522 of 2013 to implead himself as a defendant in the said suit, on the ground that he is the absolute owner of 5/6th undivided share in the suit property by virtue of a settlement deed dated 31.10.2012 executed by his father in his favour. 3. According to the Civil Revision Petitioner, the suit property being House, Ground and...
S. Abraham and Another Vs. The Management of Tamil Nadu State Transpor ...
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 1st Respondent to pay the petitioner Rs.6,41,360/- towards Gratuity Rs.1,66,589/- towards E.P.F. Employees Contributions Rs.50,000/- towards Social Security Scheme benefit Rs.25,000/- towards Accident Free Service Award amount and also arrears of wages for the period from 01.09.13 to 31.03.15 payable pursuant to new wage settlement dated 13.04.2015 together with 18% interest per annum and further directing the respondents to pay him Rs.2,64,992/- towards the Pension Commutation together with 18% per annum within a time frame as may be fixed 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 Divis...
C. Nagendran Vs. The Secretary, Home Department, Chennai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2, 4 and 5 to forthwith pay adequate compensation to the petitioners family for the death of petitioner's son.) 1. The petitioner has come up with this Writ Petition claiming compensation from the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board on account of the electrocution of his son. BRIEF FACTS: 2. The petitioner is the father of Thiru.Kumar, who was an agricultural coolie. He was the only son to the petitioner and the sole breadwinner of the family. The son of the petitioner went to the Farm owned by one Velliyathevar on 09 November, 2010 to do agricultural work. The electric wire snapped and fell on him. The son of the petitioner was electrocuted. The police registered a case in Crime No. 286 of 2010 on the file of Kandamanoor Police Station. The post-mortem was conducted by the Doctors of Government Hospital, Theni. 3. According to the petitioner, th...
K. Anandan Vs. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corpor ...
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 settle payment of a. Gratuity amount - Rs.4,22,657/- b. Earned Leave - Rs.58,816/- payable to the petitioner with reasonable rate of interest within the stipulated time.) 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 extrac...
P. Shanmughasundaram Vs. N. Shanmugam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-02-2016
(Prayer in CMA.No.934 of 2013 Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order of the Learned District Munsif, Rasipuram in I.A.No.824 of 2012 in O.S.No.6 of 2006, dated 04.12.2012.) Common Order 1. It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner in both cases that the suit in O.S.No.6 of 2016 was settled between the parties before the Taluk Legal Services Committee, Sub Court, Rasipuram, Namakkal on 06.12.2014. 2. In view of the above, these Civil Revision Petitions are closed as settled out of Court. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition are also closed. No costs....
Theen @ Abdul Rahman and Another Vs. The State, Rep. by The Inspector ...
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 the Crime No.186 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same.) 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.186 of 2016 has been registered under Sections 420 and 506(i) IPC by the 1st respondent against the petitioners. 3. The allegations in the complaint is that the 1st petitioner herein approached the defacto complainant's husband and assured him to get a Driver job in a company at Riyadh; that the defacto complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- to the 2nd petitioner as directed by the 1st petitioner; when the defacto comp...
P. Velusamy and Others Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Tra ...
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 22.08.2016.) 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. Arulsamy Vs. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corpo ...
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 settle payment of a. Earned Leave - 163 days b. Medical Leave and Old Medical Leave and other retiral benefits payable to the petitioner with reasonable rate of interest within the stipulated time.) 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.3...
The Secretary Fatima College (Autonomous) Mary Land, Madurai and Anoth ...
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 CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS to call for the records relating to the impugned proceeding issued by 3rd respondent/Joint Director in A. Thi. Mu. No.3583/004/2016, dated 00.04.2016, quash the same and further direct him to approve forthwith the appointment of P.Magdalene Virjini as Assistant professor in the Department of Home Science with Food Bio Technology in the petitioner's college and disburse the grant in aid towards her salary and allowances w.e.f. 17.06.2015.) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS to call for the records relating to the impugned proceeding issued by 3rd respondent, Joint Director in A.Thi.Mu.No.0853/E1/2015 dated 23.03.2015, quash the same and further direct him to approve forthwith the appointment of 4 teaching staff, namely, Mr.C.Rajaathinam, Dr.Vasantha Arockia Selvi, Dr...
Selvamani and Others Vs. Minor K. Gomathi rep. by mother and guardian ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Sep-01-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree dated 22.11.2006 made in A.S.No. 4 of 2006 on the file of the Additional District Court - Fast track Court No.IV, Bhavani, reversing the judgment and decree dated 03.12.2004 made in O.S.No.220 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Bhavani.) The appellants are the defendants 5 to 15 in a suit for partition. The respondents herein are the plaintiffs. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The appellate Court allowed the Appeal and thereby decreed the suit. 2. The case of the plaintiffs is as follows: a) The first plaintiff is the daughter and the second plaintiff is the wife of the first defendant. The suit property originally belonged to one Subramani Asari. He died instate leaving behind his sons namely, first to third defendants to inherit the property. Therefore, the first plaintiff being the daughter of the first defendant, is entitled to 1/5th share in the suit property along with h...