Court : Chennai Madurai
..... delay. therefore, the question that arises for consideration is as to whether the first respondent is bound to consider such application filed under section 5 of the limitation act. answer to such question is already made by this court in the decision reported in cdj 2010 mhc 1233 (cited supra), wherein the learned single judge, ..... the first respondent. 4. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the first respondent ought to have considered the application under section 5 of the limitation act and excised his power to decide such application, instead of rejecting the appeal as the time barred one. in support of his submission, the learned counsel relied ..... is filed challenging the order of the first respondent dated 15.04.2016 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner under section 47a(5) of the indian stamp act, on the ground that the same was filed beyond the period of limitation. 2. heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned special .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... . (x) with regard to sub rule (d) of rule 4, we are unable to see any infirmity in the same qua the said parent act. the parent act by its very scheme envisages the functions of a religious institution/ temple being performed by a natural person. as stated supra, it is the case of ..... tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments department, government of tamil nadu, (hereinafter referred as 'tnhr and ce department' for brevity) by applying the said parent act. (ii) on 17.08.2015, petitioner society filed five writ petitions (all pils) challenging appointment of executive officers by the commissioner, tnhr and ce department to ..... self contained statute relating to the administration and governance of hindu religious and charitable institutions and endowments in the state of tamil nadu. the said parent act was enacted with the intention of amending and consolidating the law relating to the administration and governance of hindu religious and charitable institutions and endowments in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... receipt of the same, a case in crime no.244/2008 was registered in kanai police station, under sections 376, 511 ipc read with 3(1)(xi) of sc/st act and immediately he forwarded the fir to the concerned authorities and submitted the copy of the fir to the concerned deputy superintendent of police for further investigation. (e) the deputy ..... for the appellant/accused also contended that the finding of the trial court that the accused is guilty of the offence under section 3(2)(v) of the sc/st act is also not sustainable since no material was produced by the prosecution to substantiate the charge. it is not in dispute that the victim belongs to scheduled caste community and ..... accused and the victim family. in such circumstances, it is apparent that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge under section 3(2)(v) of the sc/st act against the accused and the finding of the trial court that the accused is guilty of the offence of the aforesaid section and the reason stated by it for arriving .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... and 18.11.2015. 2. the petitioner filed the present petition in the capacity of general secretary, anti corruption movement registered under the tamil nadu societies registration act, 1975 bearing no.349 of 2001, filed the present petition to register the fir based on the complaint dated 30.10.2015 and 18.11.2015. ..... unfortunately, the first respondent accepted the conclusion of the investigating officer by ignoring the mandatory provisions of section 13(1)(d) of the pc act and recommended for departmental action against the accused officer without prosecuting the accused by registering fir. thus, the first respondent and the inspector who prepared the report ..... were acted contrary to law, abusing the powers to save the accused from criminal prosecution, thereby committed an offence punishable under section 218 of ipc. 4. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
..... to theni to appear before the trial court to contest the case. 6. though mr.s.venkatesh, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the said contention, even as per the act, the court, which has got jurisdiction over the place of wife, can entertain the petition regarding matrimonial cases. moreover, the honourable supreme court also held that the convenience of wife .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... be seen that as rightly found by the courts below, the defendant having admitted his signature in the suit promissory note, the presumption under section 118 of the negotiable instruments act comes into play and accordingly, it is for the defendant to establish that he had subscribed his signature in the document dated 09.01.2003 as put forth by him .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the Fair and Decretal orders, dated 28.02.2013, made in I.A.No.131 of 2012 in O.S.No.71 of 2009, on the file of the Court of the First Additional District Munsif, Bhavani, Erode District and is liable to be set aside.) 1. The issue that arises for consideration in the instant revision petition is regarding the ambit and scope of under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 regarding the appointment of Advocate Commissioner. 2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present civil revision petition is that the civil suit in O.S.No.71 of 2009 was filed by the respondents praying for declaration and permanent injunction with respect to the cart track situated in R.S.No.142 of Patlur Village. During the pendency of the suit, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed at the instance of the revision petitioner who has filed a report and plan. Later it appears that the 1st plaintiff ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... civil suit is filed under order vii rule 1 of cpc read with order ii rule 1 of the original side rules and sections 55 and 62 of the copyright act, for the reliefs as stated therein.) this civil suit had been filed to pass a judgement and decree against the defendants:- a. granting declaration, declaring that the plaintiff is alone .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... original defendants 1 to 3. the averments in the plaint clearly indicate that disputes sought to be adjudicated in the suit is not a dispute arising under wakf act. therefore, this court hold that the civil court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit for bare injunction against third parties in order to prevent them from creating ..... the tribunal alone excluded from the civil court jurisdiction. section 85 does not disclose ouster of civil court jurisdiction in total. only the matters specifically covered under wakf act alone are excluded from the purview of the civil court jurisdiction. 19. in this regard, it is useful to refer the judgment of this court in salem ..... suit is not covered under such dispute. hence, it is submitted by the learned counsels that civil court jurisdiction cannot be ousted merely on the basis of such act. hence, the learned senior counsel and the counsel for wakf bord prayed for dismissal of the application. 9. the learned senior counsel appearing for the original .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... know that the 1st defendant, without the consent of the plaintiff and the 2nd defendant and without obtaining permission of the court under section 8 of the guardian and wards act, had executed the sale deed, dated 18.11.2004, registered as document no.2695 of 2004, in favour of the 3rd defendant, who is a stranger to the family conveying .....
Tag this Judgment!