Chennai Court January 2017 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.
V. Baskaran, Vs. The Managing Director, Trichy Region, Tamil Nadu Stat ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent proceedings in TNSTC/KUM/TRY/D7/6156/2014, dated 8.2.2016 and quash the same.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent proceedings in TNSTC/KUM/TRY/D7/6156/2014, dated 8.2.2016 and quash the same. 2. Mr.D.Sivaraman,learned counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3. The Petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition only on the ground that the Petitioner's explanation/representation, dated 4.9.2016 which was sent by post and also given in person was not considered. But the Petitioner has already given an appeal. Admittedly, the Petitioner's appeal was rejected on 3.8.2016. There is no chance for ...
Yuvaraj Vs. State rep. by its the Inspector of Police, Negamam Police ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to set aside the order dated 18.11.2016 in Cr.M.P.No.5775 of 2016 in S.T.C.No.1616 of 2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Pollachi which the prayer of the petitioner for recalling the prosecution witnesses No.PW1, PW2 for further cross examination. 1. Challenging the order dated 18.11.2016 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Pollachi in Crl.M.P.No.5775 of 2016 in STC No.1616 of 2011, the present Criminal Original Petition came to be filed. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is facing trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Pollachi in S.T.C.No.1616 of 2011 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 and 353 IPC. During the course of trial, he filed a petition in C.M.P.No.5775 of 2016 under Section 311 Cr.P.C seeking to cross examine PW1 and PW2. However, the said petition was dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Pollachi, by the order ...
Chinnasamy (Deceased) and Others Vs. Dhanabagyam @ Seethalakshmi and O ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer :Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and decree of the learned third Additional District Judge of Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri dated 30.04.2002 in A.S.No.23 of 1998 confirming the Judgment and Decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Krishnagiri dated 22.04.1997 in O.S.No.261 of 1997.) 1. The suit is for declaration, possession, mesne profit past and future. The second defendant is the appellant herein. He has filed this appeal aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the Court below. 2. The brief facts of the case is as follows:- a. The suit was filed by one Nagaraja Manikkar and the legal heirs of Andiappa Manikkar. They were arrayed as plaintiffs 1 to 9 respectively against T.S.Subbaraya Manikkar and 9 others. Pending suit, the first appeal and the second appeal, many of the original contesting parties died and their legal heirs are arrayed as parties to the lis. b. The suit properties originally belonged to one Chennanna Manikkar...
Chitra Bhakthavatsalam and Others Vs. Sithi Fareetha
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge, II Fast Track Court at Chennai dismissing A.S.No.604 of 2008, confirming the judgment and decree order dated 16.07.2008 passed by the V Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai allowing the suit filed by the respondent in O.S.No.6598 of 2005 and to set aside the same.) 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the defendants against the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2010 passed in A.S.No.604 of 2008 on the file of the Additional District Judge, II Fast Track Court, Chennai, confirming the judgment and decree dated 16.07.2008 passed in O.S.No.6598 of 2005 on the file of the V Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The suit has been laid by the plaintiff for declaration and Mandatory injunction. 3. Pursuant to the agreement of sale entered into between the plaintiff and the first defendant in respect of the suit property ...
V. Nagamuthu and Another Vs. The Secretary to Government and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the second respondent in proceedings Nos.M5/8213/M5/2012, dated 30.06.2012 and M5/8214/M5/2012 dated 02.07.2012 respectively and quash the same and direct the respondents to allot one shop each to the petitioners.) Common Order: 1. Heard Mr.E.Sampath Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.A.Zakir Hussain, learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent and Mr.S.Prabu, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent. 2. Since the facts and cause of action in both the writ petitions are one and the same, a common order is being passed. 3. On 26.12.2004, when tsunami had struck the Marina coastal area, the tenements including that of the petitioners were destroyed. The Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board was entrusted with the work of reconstruction of tenements and the tsunami affected fa...
P. Marudhamuthu Vs. The Tamilnadu State Transport, Corporation (Kumbak ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Order or Direction or in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay the entire eligible terminal benefits payable to the petitioner including Terminal Leave Salary together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of his retirement to till the date of payment within the time that may be stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. The petitioner was employed as Foreman in the respondent Corporation and he retired from service on 31.03.2013 on attaining the age of superannuation. 2. He has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to pay the retirement benefits. 3. The First Bench of this Court in similar matter has passed an order dated 12.06.2015 in W.A.(MD) Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, issuing direction to the transport Corporations to settle the terminal benefits of its employees in equal monthly instalments and to pay ...
D. Lourdu Medona, St.Theresa's Girls Higher Secondary School, Karur Vs ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings dated 09.10.2015 in A.Thi.Mu.No.6732/A4/2015, on the file of the fourth respondent and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to accord approval to the appointment of the Petitioner Mrs.D.Lourdu Medona, working as Laboratory Assistant in St.Theresa's Girls Higher Secondary School, Karur- 639 004, Karur District., w.e.f.03.08.2015 with all monetary and other service benefits.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking to quash the order of the fourth respondent,dated 09.10.2015 in A.Thi.Mu.No.6732/A4/2015, on the file of the fourth respondent and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to accord approval to the appointment of the Petitioner Mrs.D.Lourdu Medona, working as Laboratory Assistant in St.Theresa's Girls Higher Secondary School, Karur- 639 004, Karur Distri...
M. Manasa Vs. The Managing Director, State Express Transport Corporati ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the Gratuity, Encashment of Leave salary, Social Security, Scheme Benefits, Medical, Engineering and Polytechnic Colleges Contributions and Difference of Employees Provident Fund with 18% interest per annum to the petitioner within a stipulated period fixed by this Court.) 1. The petitioner was employed as Selection Grade Senior Tradesman in the respondent Corporation and he retired from service on 30.04.2016 on attaining the age of superannuation. 2. He has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to pay the retirement benefits. 3. The First Bench of this Court in similar matter has passed an order dated 12.06.2015 in W.A.(MD) Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, issuing direction to the transport Corporations to settle the terminal benefits of its employees in equal monthly instalments and to pay 6% interest on the...
M/s. Advantage Strategic Consulting Pvt Ltd. Represented by its Direct ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer: WP No. 40240 of 2015:- Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Declaration declaring that the search warrants dated 01.12.2015 and the search operations conducted by the respondents on 01.12.2015 at the premises of the petitioner company at Flat 3B, Balaji Apartments, 7/4, Nandanam Extension Main Road, Chennai - 600 035 and at the residential premises of the Directors of the Petitioner company and the consequential proceedings against the petitioner-company and its Directors are ultra vires and in excess of the powers conferred under Section 37 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 read with Section 132 of the Income Tax, without authority of law, arbitrary, malafide, for a collateral purpose and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.) Common Order: 1. By consent of counsel on either side, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal. 2. The only point raised and argued in all these writ petitions is as re...
Palanivel and Others Vs. Union of India, rep by the Secretary, Ministr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-05-2017
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to continue with the license as per the earlier terms and consequently direct the respondents to frame a scheme under Section 38 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 for those running the telephone booths in railway platform and railway stations.) 1. Heard Mr.R.Subramanian, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.Ravikumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioners are visually impaired and differently-abled persons who were running STD booths in various railway stations under the licence granted by the third respondent herein. Since the respondents had dispossessed them and had subsequently prevented them from carrying on STD booths, they had collectively filed the present writ petition seeking for a writ of mandamus, directing t...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »