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.
A. Santha Devi Vs. The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, repres ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent dated 7.10.2009 issued in the reference MDRO:TSS:RET and quash the same and to direct the respondent to consider the application of the Petitioner dated 23.6.2009 and appoint the Petitioner as dealer for the retail outlet for the area mentioned in Item No.129 of the Advertisement published in Hindu, dated 25.5.2009.) 1. When the matter was called on 16.12.2016, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner and hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for dismissal''. Even today also, there is no representation on behalf of the Petitioner. 2. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs....
N. Thilakavathi Vs. R. Santhamani and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer:Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the fourth respondent to consider the representation dated 24.12.2016 and dispose the same as per law as sent by the petitioner requesting the fourth respondent viz. District Collector, Coimbatore to take urgent action and to take effective steps to recover the remaining portion of the award passed by Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore vide his award passed in W.C. No.17/2008 to realise the 12% interest portion of the award from the 1st and 2nd respondents from the date of 24.06.2012 to till realisation along with Rs.1,000/- as compensation under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act 1864.) 1. This writ petition has been filed by N.Thilakavathi, seeking a direction to the District Collector, Coimbatore/the fourth respondent herein to dispose of the pending representation dated 24.12.2016, on merits, so as to take effective steps to recover the remaining por...
P. Murugan Vs. The Registrar, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and Ot ...
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 relating to the order, dated 10.09.2014 made in RA(SA) No.49 of 2013, on the file of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, the first respondent herein and quash the same.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this writ petition, is to an order made in RA(SA) No.49 of 2013, dated 10.09.2014, on the file of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, the first respondent herein, by which, the Appellate Tribunal has ordered the writ petitioner to pay the deficit court fee, and granted time, upto 03.12.2014. 2. According to the writ petitioner, he is the owner of the property comprised in Plot.No.69, Harita Enclave, Survey No.384 of 1A1 and 1A2 situated in Tambaram Village and Taluk, Kanchipuram District, admeasuring about 3160 sq.ft., having purchased the same fromMr.C.N.Embar and Mr.A.S.Ramanujam, both represented by power of Attorney Mr.V.Balasubramanian (Doc.No...
Lancor Guduvanchery Developments Limited, VTN Square, Represented by i ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Petitions filed under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 to sanction the Scheme of Amalgamation.) 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 amalgamation concerning Lancor Guduvanchery Developments Limited (in short 1st transferor company), Lancor Sriperumbudur Developments Limited (in short 2nd transferor company) and Lancor Holdings Limited (in short transferee company), with effect from 01.04.2015. The scheme of amalgamation (in short scheme) is appended as Annexure '8' to the respective petitions. 2. The petitioner in C.P.No.142 of 2016 is the 1st transferor company; the petitioner in C.P.No.143 of 2016 is the 2nd transferor company and the respondent in C.P.Nos.142 and 143 of 2016 is the transferee company. 2.1. To be noted, in paragraph No.23 of the petitions, it is stated that both the transferor companies are wholly owned subsidiary of the transferee com...
Director General Fishery Survey of India Botawala Chambers Mumbai and ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the second respondent herein culminating with its order dated 06.11.2012 passed in O.A.No.553/2011 and quash the same.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated 06.11.2012 made in Original Application No.553/2011, by which, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, has directed the writ petitioners to grant Assured Career Progression (in short ACP) to the first respondent, in the pay scale of 4500 - 7000, with effect from 09.08.1999, with all consequential benefits. The writ petitioners are further directed to pass such an order, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. 2. Facts leading to the writ petition are that the first respondent was initially appointed to the post of Cook with effect from 19.07.1972 (Group 'C' Non-Ministerial) in the then pay scale of Rs.100-5-130...
K. Iyeswaran (since deceased) and Others Vs. G. Iyeswarialakshmi and A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Original Petition No 221 of 2008 was filed under Sections 232 and 276 of Indian Succession Act, XXXIX of 1925 for the grant of letters of Administration. Against this petition a Caveat was filed on 28.04.2008 by the Caveators As per order of this Court dated 17.06.2008 in O.P.No.221 of 2008, the Original Petition No.221 of 2008 was converted into Testamentary Original Suit No.22 of 2008.) 1. The petition originally filed for the grant of Letters of Administration has been converted as suit in view of the caveat filed by the defendants herein. 2. The brief facts of the plaintiffs' case may be stated as follows: (i) The plaintiffs 1 and 2 are the sons of Mrs.K.Saroja, wife of late R.Kothandaraman Pillai, died on 11.07.2007, who is the testatrix. The said K.Saroja left a Will dated 14.07.2006 bequeathing the suit property in favour of plaintiffs 1 and 2. The plaintiffs 1 and 2 are the only beneficiaries under the said will. The deceased K.Saroja had not mentioned any executor of ...
G. Indirani and Others Vs. K. Arjunan
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, against the Petition and order passed in I.A.No.689 of 2010 in O.S.No.549 of 2008, on the file of the Principal Sub-Judge, Coimbatore, dated 01.07.2011 and to set aside the same.) 1. The defendants are the civil revision petitioners before this Couurt, challenging the order of dismissal passed in I.A.No.689 of 2010 in O.S.No.549 of 2008, dated 01.07.2011 by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore. 2. It is an unfortunate case of the dismissal of the condone delay petition filed by the defendants for condoning the delay of 68 days for filing the set aside application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. 3. The Courts below must have seen the petitions which are they dealing the Interlocutory Applications about the nature of the applications and thereafter they should pass suitable orders for avoiding the multiplicity proceedings of the case. 4. This is one of the case an example that the learned Principal Subordinate Jud...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
1. Heard both sides. 2. According to the Petitioners/A1 and A2, they are abiding the condition imposed by this Court, in Crl.M.P.No.5789 of 2016 in Crl.A.No.380 of 2016 dated 06.07.2016, from 03.08.2016 till date. 3. The reason ascribed on behalf of the Petitioners is that by virtue of the condition imposed by this Court in Crl.M.P.No.5789 of 2016 in Crl.A.No.380 of 2016 dated 06.07.2016, they are unable to attend their normal duties and they are put to hardship and sufferings. Further, they are not able to attend to their family affairs in a proper manner. 4. The fact that the Petitioners are abiding the condition imposed by this Court in Crl.M.P.No.5789 of 2016 in Crl.A.No.380 of 2016 dated 06.07.2016 without any default, is not disputed on behalf of the Respondent/Prosecuting Agency. 5. Considering the fact that the Petitioners/A1 and A2 are abiding the condition imposed by this Court in Crl.M.P.No.5789 of 2016 in Crl.A.No.380 of 2016 dated 06.07.2016 without any default [as seen fr...
Bagyalakshmi and Others Vs. Kanagaraj and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, against the Fair and Decreetal order dated 03.10.2013 made in I.A.No.381 of 2013 in O.S.No.760 of 2009, on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.) 1. The defendants are the revision petitioners before this Court, challenging the order passed in I.A.No.381 of 2013 in O.S.No.760 of 2009 dated 03.10.2013. 2. Originally, the suit has been filed by the first respondent/plaintiff against this petitioners/defendants for specific performance. On receiving of summons, this petitioners/ defendants have filed their written statement by denying the above allegations. 3. While pendency of the above suit, this petitioners/defendants has filed an application in I.A.No.381 of 2013 for impleading one Mr.Ravikumar, the Ex. Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank, Avinashi Road, Coimbatore, who is presently working as Manager, REPCO Bank, Upplipalayam, Coimbatore, as fifth defendant in the suit. 4. I...
J. Muthiah and Others Vs. The Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit, ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-03-2017
(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 second respondent I.e., the Commissioner of Municipality, Virudhunagar relating to Na.Ka.No.C1/12154/2012, dated 25.10.2016 and to quash the same and consequently to order refund of the amount already recovered from the pay of the Petitioner from the month of October 2016. Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in Lr.RC.No.45529/F3/2010, dated 21.5.2015 and consequential impugned recovery order of the fourth respondent proceedings in Na.Ka.No.C1/12154/2012, dated 22.01.2016 and to quash the same.) Common Order: 1. W.P(MD)No.24353 of 2016 has been filed for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent I.e., the Co...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »