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.
N. Natarajan Vs. N. Chidambara Gounder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, against the fair and decretal order dated 11.07.2011 made in I.A.No.514 of 2010 in I.A.No.456 of 2005 in O.S.No.159 of 2005, on the file of the District Munjsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai.) 1. Heard Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.K.Kumarasamy, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. A perusal of records show that the respondent herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.159/2005 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Perundurai, has filed the said suit against the respondent herein and others for the relief of Partition of 1/14th share and for permanent injunction against the defendants 7 to 9. The said suit was decreed and a Preliminary Decree for partition was granted by Judgment and Decree dated 27.10.1994. 3. It is the case of the petitioner herein that he was added as 18th defendant in the above said suit. During the pendency of the said suit, the...
T. Senthil Kumar and Another Vs. The Registrar(Housing), Tamil Nadu Ho ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the second respondent in Tha.Va.No.1155/03-04, dated 3.10.2016 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the third respondent to close the loan No.6 lies in the name of the Petitioner and his brother by crediting the amount a sum of Rs.2,72.681/- and to release the property documents belong to the Petitioners.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the second respondent in Tha.Va.No.1155/03-04, dated 3.10.2016 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the third respondent to close the loan No.6 lies in the name of the Petitioner and his brother by crediting the amount a sum of Rs.2,72.681/- and to release the property documents belong to the Petitioners. 2...
A.K.S. Ravichandar Vs. Venkateswara Hospitals rep. by its Partners and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.40 of 2009 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Chengalpet and dated 29.09.2010 in confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No.21 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, Chengalpet and dated 16.09.2009.) 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 29.09.2010 made in A.S.No.40 of 2009 on the file of the Principal District Court, Chengalpet, confirming the judgment and decree dated 16.09.2009 made in O.S.No.21 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Chengalpet. 2. The suit has been laid by the plaintiff's hospital for declaration, possession and permanent injunction. 3. The case of the plaintiffs, in brief, is as follows: The plaintiff's hospital has purchased A schedule property of an extent of 2 acres 78 cents in old dry survey No.120/3B, new dry survey No.120/3C in No.86, Thirutheri village, ...
Thol. Thirumavalavan and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by it ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer In W.P.No.36467 of 2006 : Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide proportionate reservation in the post of Chairman of Town Panchayats by allotting the reserved posts to every Block taking into consideration the population of SCs/STs. in all the Town Panchayats in every such Block and proportionate reservation for the post of Chairman of Municipal Councils by allotting the reserved posts to every District taking into consideration the population of SCs/STs in all the Municipalities in every such District, and to further provide for proportionate reservation in the post of Vice Chairman in the Town Panchayats and Vice Chairman in Municipality Councils in Tamilnadu in favour of SCs/Sts. and Women in the same manner. Prayer In W.P.No.36797 of 2006 Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the rec...
Sree Gokulam Chit and Finance Company Pvt. Limited, represented by its ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 Cr.P.C., against the order dated 30.08.2016 passed in C.C.No.53/2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam.) The Appellant/Complainant has focused the instant Criminal Appeal before this Court as against the order dated 30.08.2016 in C.C.No.53/2011 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam. 2. The Learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam, while passing the order in C.C.No.53/2011 on 30.08.2016, had observed the following: Complainant absent. No representation. Bailable warrant pending. As the Complainant did not appear before this Court and take steps to proceed the case this Court issued notice to the complainant to appear today in D.No.1518/2016 on 26.07.2016 and that notice has been served and AD card received. The notice has been sent to the address mentioned in the complainant. This case is of the year 2011. Therefore, this Court constrained to dismiss this complaint under Section 256 of the Cr.P....
S. Reshma Vs. Debt Recovery Tribunal rep. by its Registrar and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order vide OA/TA/SA/SR No.7183/2013 dated 21/1/2014 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to take on file Appeal SR.No.7183/2013 and dispose the same on merits and in accordance with law.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. On 13/7/2011, in D.R.C.No.161/2010, in O.A.No.119 of 2007, Debts Recovery Tribunal I, Chennai, has passed the following order:- Whereas you the defendants have failed to pay the sum of Rs.6,04,67,154.42 p (Rupees Six crores four lakhs sixty seven thousand one hundred and fifty four and paise forty two only), payable by you, jointly and severally, to the applicant in terms of Debt Recovery Certificate No.161/2010 dated 14/12/2010 issued in O.A.No.119/2007 drawn up by the Hon'ble Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal I, at Chennai, and further interest and costs payable as ...
M/s. Chamunda Steels, Represented b y its Proprietor J.Babu singh, Mad ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the respondent in TIN 33164820952/2014-15, dated 8.9.2015 and proceedings dated 29.11.2016 and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice and to direct the respondent to pass assessment order by considering the objection and records filed by the Petitioner vide application dated 8.6.2016 on merits after affording opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner within the time frame fixed by this Court.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the respondent in TIN 33164820952/2014-15, dated 8.9.2015 and proceedings dated 29.11.2016 and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice and to direct the respondent to pass assessment order by...
Kasinatha Padayachi Vs. Govindasami Padayachi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, against the order dated 31.01.2012 made in E.A.No.98 of 2010 in E.P.No.29 of 2002 in O.S.No.154 of 1985 passed by the District Munsif, Ariyalur.) 1. Heard Mr.R.Thiagarajan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Janarthanan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. A perusal of records show that the respondent in this Civil Revision Petition, as plaintiff has filed a suit against the petitioner herein in O.S.No.154/1985 before the District Munsif, Ariyalur for Recovery of Possession, past 3 year damages of Rs.3,000/- and for future Mesne Profits Under Order 20 Rule 12 of C.P.C. The said suit was decreed by Judgment and Decree dated 27.11.1987. It is seen from the records that the petitioner herein has filed appeal as against the above said Decree in A.S.No.2/1988 and the same was dismissed on 14.08.1990. But there was no further appeal by the petitioner herein. 3. The respondent ...
N. Ramathilagam Vs. Arul Mighu Arunachaleeswarer Thirukkoil, Represent ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 29.07.2010 in A.S.No.247 of 2008 on the file of the III Fast Track Court, Chennai confirming the appeal on 02.11.2006 in O.S.No.3341 of 2001 on the file of the V Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.) 1. Challenge in this second appeal is made by the defendant against the Judgment and decree dated 29.07.2010 passed in A.S.No.247 of 2008 on the file of the III Fast Track Court, Chennai, confirming the judgment and decree dated 02.11.2006 passed in O.S.No.3341 of 2001 on the file of the V Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. 2. The suit has been laid by the plaintiff for possession, arrears of rent and damages. 3. The second appeal has been admitted and the following substantial question of law is formulated for consideration in this second appeal. "Whether the Executive Officer has locus standi to institute the suit on behalf of the plaintiff's Temple? 4. The plaintiff ...
Murugesan Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corpor ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records in pursuant to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Se.Mu.Na.Ka.No.R2/5269/2016, dated 27.10.2016, confirming the order of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.5416/14(Oo), dated 11.5.2015 confirming the order of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.A3/1765/2013, dated 11.11.2014 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to reinstate the Petitioner in the post of Sales man of Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited with all attendant benefits.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records in pursuant to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Se.Mu.Na.Ka.No.R2/5269/2016, dated 27.10.2016, confirming the order of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.5416/14(Oo), dated 11.5.2015 confirming the order of the third respon...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »