Chennai Court July 2025 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.
Mohamed Yasser Kareem Vs Riyas Fathima
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 29.07.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and Crl.M.P.No.13382 of 2025 Mohamed Yasser Kareem ... PetitionerVersusRiyas Fathima ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 438 r/w 442 of the Bharthiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to set aside the order dated 11.11.2024 passed in M.P.No.1039 of 2023 in M.C.No.251 of 2023 on the file of the VI-Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai, by allowing this Criminal revision case. For Petitioner : Mr. V. Nallasenapathy, for Mr. R. Manickavel For Respondent : Mr. K. NizamuddinORDERThis revision has been preferred against the order dated 11.11.2024 passed in M.P.No.1039 of 2023 in M.C.No.251 of 2023 on the file of the VI- Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai, thereby directing the petitioner herein/respondent therein to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the respondent herein.2. The petitioner is t...
Chinnusamy vs Gugan Babu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 29-07-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI1. CHINNUSAMY S/o. Late Karuppa Gounder, Veppanatham Pudur, Vasanthapuram Post, Namakkal.2. RAJAMANI W/o. Subramanian, Alamarathupatty, Musiri Taluk, Trichy.3. RASAMMAL W/o. Periyasamy, Kuppampalayam, N. Pudupatty, Namakkal.4. ARUKKANI W/o. Veerappan, Veppanatham Pudur, Vasanthapuram Post, Namakkal. Appellant(s) Vs1. Gugan Babu S/o. Natarajan, No.130, Trichengode Road, Namakkal. 2.Shri Ram Gen. Insurance Co. Ltd VCTV, Main Road, Sathy Road, Erode. Respondent(s)PRAYER To enhance the compensation amount awarded in the Judgement and Decree Dated 11.01.2017 made in MCOP.No. 870 of 2013 on the file of MACT/Principal District Judge, at Namakkal with interest and cost by allowing this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and thus render justice For Appellant(s): Mr.B.Manimekalai For Respondent(s): Mrs.R.Sreevidhya For R2ORDER29-07-2025 Index:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:Yes Neutral Cita...
Narayanamma vs Thimmarayappa (Deceased),1. Sivashankar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated :29.07.2025CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI C.R.P.No.2466 of 2025 Narayanamma ... Petitioner vs Thimmarayappa (Deceased) Nanjappa (Deceased) Gowramma (Deceased)1. Sivashankar 2.Sivakumar 3.Seethalingam 4.Nagaraju 5.Shankarappa 6.Aswath Narayana 7.Gopal 8.Narayanasamy 9.Nanjamma 10.Pillappa 11.Thimmaraj 12.Saraswathi .. RespondentsRevision filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India directing the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate No.1 at Hosur to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.204 of 2015 within a stipulated time as framed by this Hon'ble Court. For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.MaitreyaP.B.BALAJI.,J.srORDERThe revision petitioner is the first plaintiff in O.S.No.204 of 2015 on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate No.I, Hosur.2. It is seen that the suit has been pending from 2015 onwards and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, now the suit is posted for recording of exparte evid...
Sivasankari vs Rajasegar
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated :29.07.2025CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI Sivasankari ... Petitioner vs Rajasegar .. Respondent Petition filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code to withdraw HMOP No.737 of 2023 on the file of Family Court, Puducherry and transfer the same to the file of Sub Court, Karaikal. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vetriselvi For Respondent : No appearanceORDERWhen the matter is taken up for hearing today, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the petition. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the court bundle.P.B.BALAJI.,J.sr2. Permission is granted. In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Tr.C.M.P.No.582 of 2024 is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. 29.07.2025 Index: Yes/No Website:yes/noSpeaking Order/Non-speaking Ordersr To The Sub Court, Karaikal...
Axis Bank Ltd vs Rintu Bibin
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
M/s.Axis Bank Ltd. ... Applicant Vs. Rintu Bibin ... RespondentTill date, the vehicle has not been repossessed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the vehicle could not be located. Sufficient opportunity has been granted to the applicant to enable the advocate commissioner to execute the warrant of commission. However, till date, the advocate commissioner could not execute the warrant of commission since the vehicle is not traceable.2. No useful purpose will be served, if this application is allowed to be keptpending. Accordingly, this application is closed. However, liberty is granted to the applicant to file a fresh application seeking for appointment of an advocate commissioner as and when the vehicle is located. While considering the fresh application, this Court shall consider retaining the very same advocate commissioner, who has been appointed in this application since the applicant has already paid the initial remuneration to the advocate commissioner.ab ab...
Axis Bank Ltd vs Kongari Praveen
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
M/s.Axis Bank Ltd. ... Applicant Vs. Kongari Praveen ... RespondentTill date, the vehicle has not been repossessed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the vehicle could not be located. Sufficient opportunity has been granted to the applicant to enable the advocate commissioner to execute the warrant of commission. However, till date, the advocate commissioner could not execute the warrant of commission since the vehicle is not traceable.2. No useful purpose will be served, if this application is allowed to be keptpending. Accordingly, this application is closed. However, liberty is granted to the applicant to file a fresh application seeking for appointment of an advocate commissioner as and when the vehicle is located. While considering the fresh application, this Court shall consider retaining the very same advocate commissioner, who has been appointed in this application since the applicant has already paid the initial remuneration to the advocate commissioner.ab ab...
Axis Bank Ltd vs Ashok Kumar
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
M/s.Axis Bank Ltd. ... Applicant Vs. Ashok Kumar ... RespondentTill date, the vehicle has not been repossessed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the vehicle could not be located. Sufficient opportunity has been granted to the applicant to enable the advocate commissioner to execute the warrant of commission. However, till date, the advocate commissioner could not execute the warrant of commission since the vehicle is not traceable.2. No useful purpose will be served, if this application is allowed to be keptpending. Accordingly, this application is closed. However, liberty is granted to the applicant to file a fresh application seeking for appointment of an advocate commissioner as and when the vehicle is located. While considering the fresh application, this Court shall consider retaining the very same advocate commissioner, who has been appointed in this application since the applicant has already paid the initial remuneration to the advocate commissioner.ab ab...
Axis Bank Ltd vs Simpson Xavier
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
M/s.Axis Bank Ltd. ... Applicant Vs. Simpson Xavier ... RespondentTill date, the vehicle has not been repossessed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the vehicle could not be located. Sufficient opportunity has been granted to the applicant to enable the advocate commissioner to execute the warrant of commission. However, till date, the advocate commissioner could not execute the warrant of commission since the vehicle is not traceable.2. No useful purpose will be served, if this application is allowed to be keptpending. Accordingly, this application is closed. However, liberty is granted to the applicant to file a fresh application seeking for appointment of an advocate commissioner as and when the vehicle is located. While considering the fresh application, this Court shall consider retaining the very same advocate commissioner, who has been appointed in this application since the applicant has already paid the initial remuneration to the advocate commissioner.ab ab...
Axis Bank Ltd vs Parupudi Venkat Padma Subba Rao
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
M/s.Axis Bank Ltd. ... Applicant Vs. Parupudi Venkat Padma Subba Rao ... RespondentTill date, the vehicle has not been repossessed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the vehicle could not be located. Sufficient opportunity has been granted to the applicant to enable the advocate commissioner to execute the warrant of commission. However, till date, the advocate commissioner could not execute the warrant of commission since the vehicle is not traceable.2. No useful purpose will be served, if this application is allowed to be keptpending. Accordingly, this application is closed. However, liberty is granted to the applicant to file a fresh application seeking for appointment of an advocate commissioner as and when the vehicle is located. While considering the fresh application, this Court shall consider retaining the very same advocate commissioner, who has been appointed in this application since the applicant has already paid the initial remuneration to the advocate commiss...
Rajagopal vs the Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-29-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 29.07.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN W.P.No.13196 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.14341 to 14343 of 20241. Rajagopal2. V.Rajamohan Singh3. G.S.Mohan Singh4. D.Subburayalu ... Petitioners -vs-3. Belly Area Block 283 Flat Owners Association,Rep. by its Secretary K.Ravichandar, Having Office at No.27, Belly Area Main Road, G-Block, Anna Nagar West, Chennai- 600 040. ... Respondents 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 dated 03.04.2024 made in Z.O.VIII.C.No.2861/2023 issued by 2nd respondent, quash the same and consequently, forbear the 2nd respondent from evicting, dispossessing and demolishing the Belly Area Block 283 Flats at Old No.283, New No.27, Belly area Main Road, G.Block, Anna Nagar West, Chennai-600 040. For Petitioners : Mr.G.Ethirajulu For R1 &...