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.
Sowrirajan and Others Vs. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Manna ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur in S.C.No.33 of 2008 dated 25.09.2012.) S. Nagamuthu. J. 1. The appellant in Crl.A.No.695 of 2012 is the first accused; the appellant in Crl.A.No.740 of 2012 is the third accused and the appellant in Crl.A.No.754 of 2012 is the fourth accused in S.C.No.33 of 2008 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur. The second accused was one Mr.Manivannan. He was absconding. Hence, the case against him was split up and the appellants herein alone faced the trial. As against the first accused, the trial Court framed charges under Sections 148, 120(B), 302 r/w 149 I.P.C. As against the accused 3 and 4, the trial Court framed charges under Sections 147, 120(B), 302 r/w 149 I.P.C. By judgment dated 25.09.2012, the trial Court convicted all the three accused and sentenced them as detailed below:- Sl.NoSection of lawAccusedSentence1148, 302 r/w 149 ...
P. Sreeram and Others Vs. The Chairman, Secretary to Government of Ind ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: W.P.No.15196 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 3 to 4 to forthwith issue appointment letter to the petitioner for Post Code -01 Station Controller/Train Operator/Junior Engineer (Station) as per the selection list published by the 3rd respondent during July 2013. W.P.No.15197 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 3 to 4 to forthwith issue appointment letter to the petitioner for Post Code -01 Station Controller/Train Operator/Junior Engineer (Station) as per the selection list published by the 3rd respondent during July 2013. W.P.No.31491 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned cancellation notification dated 23.08.2016 ...
K. Padmanathan Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superin ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2015 and to issue the death benefits of the Petitioner's brother Kannan, Special Sub-Inspector of Police, who died on 14.10.2015 to the Petitioner.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking for issuance of a writ of writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2015 and to issue the death benefits of the Petitioner's brother Kannan, Special Sub-Inspector of Police, who died on 14.10.2015 to the Petitioner. 2. Mr. M. Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the second respondent. By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. It is represented by both parties that before Mediation Centre attached to this Bench, both the parties have entered into a settlement and ...
Sri Ayyappa Seva Samajam represented by its Secretary Vs. The Commissi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: This appeal is filed under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated 07.09.2015 made in O.S.No.12857 of 2009 on the file of the XII Assistant City Civil Judge, Chennai.) 1. The plaintiff in O.S.No.12857 of 2009 on the file of the XII Assistant City Civil Judge, Chennai is the appellant. The said suit was filed under Section 70 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act 1959. 2. The facts which necessitated filing of the suit are as follows: The plaintiff is the Society registered under Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. It was founded with an object of promoting cult of Lord Ayyappa irrespective of Religion, Caste, Creed or Community. The other objects of the society also includes giving educational assistance to the poor children, food to poor, establishment of educational institutions, hospitals, home for aged and disabled, providing medical assistance and education to poor, arrangement of periodical discourse a...
Dr. Balamugunthan working as a Junior Speciallist in Orthopaedic in Go ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: This appeal is filed under Section 96 of C.P.C. Against the judgement and decree dated 31.10.2007 passed in O.S.No.66 of 2004 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Puducherry at Karaikal.) 1. The second defendant in O.S.No.66 of 2004 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Puducherry at Karaikal is the appellant. 2. The above suit was filed by the first respondent claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the injuries and permanent disability suffered by her as a result of negligence and wrong treatment given in the Government Hospital at Karaikal. 3. The appellant/second defendant was working as a Specialist in Orthopedic Division at Government Hospital, Karaikal at the relevant point of time. According to the plaintiff on 26.1.1999 around 11.30 A.M. while she was returning from school after attending the Republic Day Celebration at Kamarajar Square, Karaikal, a cyclist who was coming in the opposite direction dashed against her. It is claimed that as a result...
Arokiya Marie Lemoan Vs. Franclin Marie Louis (died) and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 21.08.1997 made in A.S.No.60 of 1996 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Judge at Pondicherry, confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.09.1996 made in O.S.No.242 of 1990 on the file of the Court of the Principal District Munsif at Pondicherry.) 1. This Second Appeal with chequered history is a classic case to understand how the Courts below in their zealous to dispose of the case, are carried away by the compromise memos filed by the counsel, pass judgment without adhering to mandate of Order 23, Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code and thereafter, to justify their action as well as the counsel's action whom they trust and act, refuse to undo the wrong, despite pointing out by the affected party. 2. The suit is for delivery of vacant possession after removing the superstructure put up by the defendant. According to the plaintiffs, the suit property was let out to the defendant by their mother Santhanamary Francl...
R. Srinivasan Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principa ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to disburse all the pensionary benefits in full to the Petitioner along with interest at 12% per annum for the gratuity and commutation amount from 1.7.2016 to the date of disbursement within the time limit fixed by this Court.) 1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking for issuance of a writ of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to disburse all the pensionary benefits in full to the Petitioner along with interest at 12% per annum for the gratuity and commutation amount from 1.7.2016 to the date of disbursement within the time limit fixed by this Court. 2. Mr.M.Rajarajan, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3 and 5 and Mr.P.Gunasekaran, learned counsel takes notice for the fourth respondent. By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. It is not in dispute that the puni...
Chandra and Others Vs. Vinayagam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the Judgment and decree dated 20.04.2010 made in A.S.No.4 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 05.02.2007 made in O.S.No.143 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Madurantakam.) 1. The plaintiffs have in this Second Appeal impugned the Judgment and decree dated 20.04.2010 made in A.S.No.4 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Madurantakam confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 05.02.2007 made in O.S.No.143 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Madurantakam. 2. The suit has been laid by the plaintiffs for declaration and mandatory injunction and permanent injunction. 3. The Second Appeal has been admitted and the following substantial questions of law are formulated for consideration in this Second Appeal. (a) Whether the misreading of the documents(Villages are different) has lead to the erroneous findings by...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
M. Venugopal, J. Preface: 1. The Applicant/1st Respondent has filed the present Original Application praying for passing of an order by this Court to issue subpoena to the Chief Electoral Officer of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai 9 to produce the original Abstract Statement of Electiuon Expenditure Accounts pertaining to the returned candidate (Respondent-1 in the Election Petition) as available on the website http://www.elections.tn.gov.in/and the 'Register for Maintenance of Day to Day Accounts' Annexure 14 (Part A), 'Cash Register for Maintenance of Day to Day Accounts by Contesting Candidates' (Part B) and 'Bank Register for Maintenance of Day to Day Accounts by Contesting Candidates' (Part C) pertaining to the returned candidate (Respondent -1) in the Election Petition), submitted for General Election-2011 for No.13, Kolathur Assembly Constitutency, along with the reconciliation order passed by the District Electoral Officer and the Observer for Election Expenditure, nominated b...
S.K.P. Subramaniam and Another Vs. S.K. Chinnarsaj (Deceased) and Othe ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jan-02-2017
(Prayer: This appeal is filed under Section 96 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.321 of 2004 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Kancheepuram dated 28.10.2005.) 1. The plaintiffs in O.S.No.321 of 2004 on the file of the Additional District Judge (FTC) Kancheepuram are the appellants. The suit was filed as O.S.No.109 1993 on the file of the Sub Court, Kancheepuram. Upon transfer to the District Court, the same has been renumbered as above. 2. The plaintiffs sought for partition and separate possession of their 2/12 share in the suit properties and 1/6th share in the Joint Family businesses. According to the plaintiffs, they are sons of late Ponnusami Mudaliar, who had married their mother Muniyammal in the year 1954, since he had no issues out of the first marriage with one Marahathammal. They would further claim that the suit properties are ancestral properties belonging to the family of the sons of Kurupatha Mudaliar namely, S.K.Ponn...