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. Nachimuthu Vs. C. Saravanamoorthy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the Judgment dated 26.06.2013 is STC No. 395 of 2012 on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court (Magisterial Level), Tiruchengode and to allow this appeal.) 1. The Appellant/Complainant has filed the instant Criminal Appeal before this Court as against the STC No. 395 of 2012 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate (FTC, Magisterial Level), Tiruchengode. 2. The Learned Judicial Magistrate (FTC, Magisterial Level), Tiruchengode) while passing the impugned Judgment in STC No. 395 of 2012 on 26.06.2013 at Paragraph Nos. 47 to 49 had clearly observed the following: 47. In this case, the evidence on record makes it abundantly clear that the accused has proved the defence taken by him by preponderance of probabilities. Inference of preponderance of probabilities can be drawn not only from the materials brought on record by the parties but also by reference to the circumstances upon...
R. Parameswaran Vs. The Principal District Judge Coimbatore and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the entire records in pursuant to the proceedings of the 1st respondent issued vide A.No.263/2006 D.No.1958 and 29.09.2011 and quash the same and direct the first respondent, to promote the petitioner to any higher post as par with the 3rd respondent with all consequential and attendant benefits within a stipulated time.) Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. 1. This Writ Petition is instituted, challenging the correctness of the order passed on 29.09.2011, by the learned Principal District Judge, Coimbatore and also to direct the first respondent to consider the promotion of the writ petitioner to any higher post, on par with the third respondent. 2. The petitioner was initially recruited as a Steno-Typist on 09.01.1984, and he subsequently earned promotion as Assistant. He was posted to perform duties of a Magisterial Bench Clerk. It appears, he was having certain amou...
Dr. Balasubramanian Vs. The Registrar, Manonmaniam Sundaranar Universi ...
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 Certiorari calling for the records of the first respondent pertaining to the impugned order in MSU/R/ESTT.T/Transfer/2016, dated 23.12.2016 and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary, within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking for for issuance of a writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the first respondent pertaining to the impugned order in MSU/R/ESTT.T/Transfer/2016, dated 23.12.2016 and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary, within the time stipulated by this Court. 2. Mr.Mahaboob Athiff, learned Counsel takes notice for the respondents/University. By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. The Petitioner has submitted that he was appointed as Deputy Librarian in the year 2009 in the first respondent University and had completed educational qualification of M.L.I.SC, M.phil, Ph....
K.S. Sathyanarayanan Vs. D. Yasodha and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Original Petition No 614 of 2006 was filed under Sections 222 and 276 of Indian Succession Act, XXXIX of 1925 for the grant of probate. Against this petition a Caveat was filed on 28.09.2006 by the Caveators. As per order of this Court dated 10.10.2006 in O.P.No.614 of 2006, the Original Petition No. 614 of 2006 was converted into Testamentary Original Suit No.39 of 2006.) 1. The Executor, originally filed original petition in O.P.No.614 of 2006 to grant probate of the Will dated 05.05.1968 executed by the testatrix Tmt. Navamani Ammal. The sons and daughters were shown as respondents. As caveat was filed by the daughters, the original petition was converted into the above Testamentary Original Suit by order of this Court dated 10.10.2006. 2. The deceased Tmt. Navamani Ammal, who is the testatrix, was a resident of Madras and that she possessed all properties, within the State of Tamil Nadu. She had executed the Will on 05.05.1968. The plaintiff is the son of the testatrix and...
T. Joy Thomas Vs. The Director General, Directorate of Central Reserve ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-04-2017
(Prayer: Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order passed in W.P.No.16198 of 1999, dated 02.02.2009.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is to an order of dismissal of W.P.No.16198 of 1999, dated 02.02.2009, by which, the writ Court declined to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to promote the appellant, as Inspector of Police, CRPF, as per the approved list, 8/94, dated October, 1996, with all monetary benefits. 2. It is the case of the appellant that on 08.12.1988, he was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police, in the Central Reserve Police Force (In short, "CRPF") and worked in several stations. During October' 1996, an approved list "E" (GD) vide 8/94, was prepared, for the purpose of promoting Sub-Inspectors of Police, to the post of Inspectors of Police. In the said list, the appellant was placed at Sl.No.3. However, the appellant was issued with a charge memo, dated 25.09.1996, in terms of section 11(1) of the CRPF Act, 1...
A. Muthupandi Vs. The Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Madurai an ...
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 impugned order passed by the first respondent in R.O.CNo.3704/2015/A1, dated 8.12.2016, quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the first respondent to transfer the Petitioner from Thirupattur, Sivagangai Division to any one of the Theni District on the basis of the representation dated 5.1.2016 within the time frame fixed by thisCourt.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in R.O.CNo.3704/2015/A1, dated 8.12.2016, quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the first respondent to transfer the Petitioner from Thirupattur, Sivagangai Division to any one of the Theni District on the basis of the representation dated 5.1.2016 within the time frame fixed by ...
M/s. Renaissance RTW Asia (P) Limited, Rep. by its Director C. Anandha ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Petitions filed under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 read with Rules 9, 11(A) and 79 of Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 to sanction the scheme of arrangement (demerger).) Common Order: 1. These Company Petitions are preferred under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 for seeking a sanction of the Scheme of arrangement (Demerger) (in short the Scheme) concerning M/s.Renaissance RTW Asia (P) Limited (in short Demerged company) and M/s.RC Colours Private Limited (in short Resulting company), with effect from 01.01.2016. The Scheme is appended as Annexure 'D' to the petitions. 2. The petitioner in C.P.No.273 of 2016 is the Demerged company and, the petitioner, in C.P.No.274 of 2016 is the Resulting Company. 3. A perusal of the record shows that both the Demerged company and the Resulting company have complied with the formalities as prescribed under the Companies Act, 1956 and the Rules framed thereunder. 4. Copies of two separate resolutions of even date,...
The Secretary, Union of India, Railway Board, New Delhi and Others Vs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the 1st respondent in O.A.No.1554 of 2011, dated 06.09.2013 and quash the same.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this writ petition is to an order, made in O.A.No.1554 of 2011, dated 06.09.2013, by which, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Chennai, has quashed the order, dated 29.08.2011 of the Assistant Personnel Officer, Southern Railways, Chennai, the 3rd writ petitioner herein and further directed the writ petitioners to post the 2nd respondent as CB Fitter Grade II, on par with Mr.M.Loganathan, the 3rd respondent herein, and to grant all consequential benefits, within a period of two months, from the date of the order in Original Application. 2. Facts leading to the writ petition are that the 2nd respondent was initially appointed as Khalasi on 29.10.1983. He was promoted as Khalasi Helper and thereafter, as Saw Mechanic in the ...
M/s. Image Venture Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. M/s. Vasan Publication Pr ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
M. Sundar, J. 1. An order of the learned Master of this Court dated 16.07.2015 (in A.No.3552 of 2015) granting unconditional leave to defend, to the defendants in a summary suit has been reversed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by an order dated 27.06.2016 (in A.No.6492 of 2015) exercising powers under Order XXIV Rule 12 of the Rules of the High Court of Madras Original Side Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as O.S.Rules for brevity). This intra court appeal is directed against the order dated 27.06.2016, made by the learned Single Judge of this Court. 2. The facts of the case in a nutshell (necessary for disposal of this intra Court appeal) are as follows: 3. Factual Matrix: (i) Image Venture Private Limited, is a Private Limited Company and one R. Mathi Seelan is one of the Directors in the said company, in September 2011, approached Vasan Publication Private Limited, a Private Limited Company for financial assistance. While Vasan Publications Private Limited is a publishe...
Puthira Kounder and Another Vs. Krishnamoorthi Kounder
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and Decree dated 21.07.2009 made in A.S.No.37 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Villupuram, reversing the judgment and decree dated 07.12.2007 made in O.S.No.778 of 2004 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Villupuram.) 1. Challenge in this appeal is made by the defendants against the judgment and decree dated 21.07.2009 made in A.S.No.37 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Villupuram, reversing the judgment and decree dated 07.12.2007 made in O.S.No.778 of 2004 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Villupuram. 2. The suit has been laid by the plaintiff for partition and mesne profits. 3. The Second Appeal has been admitted and the following substantial question of law is formulated for consideration in this Second Appeal :- "Whether the judgment and decree of the first Appellate Court in decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiff...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »