Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2008CriLJ774
ORDERS. Palanivelu, J.1. These petitions have been filed to call for the records in C.C. No. 3819 of 2006 on the file of IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, and to quash the same.2. For the sake of convenience, the status of the parties, as mentioned in Crl.O.P. No. 4332 of 2007, would be referred and the petitioner in Crl.O.P. No. 8922 of 2007 by name Auxillia.3. The facts, in a nutshell, are as under:3.1. First petitioner is son of second petitioner and second respondent is the de facto complainant, who is wife of first petitioner. The marriage of first petitioner and second respondent was celebrated on 22.06.2000 in St. Theresas Church, Trichy.3.2. At the time of marriage, all the accused demanded 80 sovereigns of gold jewels and Rs. 6.00 lakhs in cash towards dowry, however, the parents of the de facto complainant offered 50 sovereigns of gold jewels, besides a sum of Rs. 1.00 lakh in cash. The couple was living at Thiruvanmiyur in Chennai. First accused left for Singapo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records in S.T.C. No.670 of 2011 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.II, Erode and quash the same.) 1. The petitioner is the accused in S.T.C. No.670 of 2011 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Erode. This case has been initiated on a private complaint by the respondent alleging that the petitioner has committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Seeking to quash the same, the petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with this criminal original petition. 2. The facts of the case would be as follows: (i) The complainant is doing textile business in Karungalpalayam, Erode District. On 10.07.2010, the accused purchased textiles from the complainant on credit as per Invoice No.7 for a sum of Rs.1,47,262/-. In discharge of the sale consideration, the accused issued a post dated cheque dated 10.09.2010 d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :30. 4-2013 CORAM The Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.K.AGRAWAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and The Hon'ble Mr.Justice N.PAUL VASANTHKUMAR W.A.No.1662 of 2010 P. Mohanasundaram .. Appellant Vs 1. The President, The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, (Set up under an Act of Parliament), P.O.No.7100, Indraprastha Marg, New Delh002. 2. The Chairman, Southern India Regional Council, The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, 122, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chenna034. .. Respondents Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 26.7.2010 passed in W.P.No.12069 of 2010. For Appellant : Mr.R. Sankara Subbu For Respondents : Mr.Krishna Srinivasan for M/s.S.Ramasubramaniam & Associates R.K. AGRAWAL, A.C.J.& N. PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR, J.This writ appeal is preferred against the order of the learned single Judge made in W.P.No.12069 of 2010 dated 26.7.2010 rejecting the request of the appellant to quash ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :20. 12.2013 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DEVADASS Criminal O.P.Nos.15467, 15573, 15982 and 15983 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 in Crl.O.P.No.15467 of 2013 1.Uma Maheswari 2.S.Yuvaraj ... Petitioners in Crl.O.P.Nos.15467, 15573 & Crl.O.P.No.15982 of 2013 Uma Maheswari ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.15983 of 2013 Vs. 1.The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. ... 1st respondent/complainant in all Crl.O.Ps. 2.R.Kailash Kumar ... 2nd respondent/Defacto complainant (in Crl.O.P.No.15467 of 2013) Crl.O.P.No.15467 of 2013 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C to quash the FIR in Crime No.99 of 2013 on the file of the respondent police. Crl.O.P.No.15573 of 2013 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C to direct the respondent to de-freeze the SB Account No.449470294 of the second petitioner and O.D. Account No.6038777616 of Maha Foundation, Proprietrix, Mrs. Uma Maheswari and safe deposit lockers sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records of the first respondent in FIR No.560 of 2015 dated 25.06.2015 and Quash the FIR No.560 of 2015 registered against the petitioners for an offence under Section 409 IPC, as being an abuse of process of law, untenable in facts and circumstances.) The petitioners herein have come forward with the present Criminal Original Petition seeking to call for the records of the first respondent in FIR No.560 of 2015 dated 25.06.2015 and Quash the FIR No.560 of 2015 registered against the petitioners for an offence under Section 409 IPC, as being an abuse of process of law, untenable in facts and circumstances. 2. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the second respondent was having 18 loan accounts in the Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, out of which one is a mortgage loan account, one is a business loan account and others are commercial vehicle loan accounts. It is ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated:3. 12/2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL Writ Petition (MD) No.18210 of 2014 a n d M.P.(MD) Nos.1 and 2 of 2014 K.R.Ravi Rathinam ... Petitioner Vs 1. The Director General of Police Dr. Kamarajar Salai Mylapore Chennai.2. The Inspector General of Police South Zone New Natham Road Madurai.3. The Commissioner of Police Madurai City Madurai.4. The Secretary The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Union of India New Delhi.5. The Secretary Information and Cinema Fort St. George Chennai.6. The Chief Producer Government of India Films Division Shastri Bhavan Haddows Road Egmore Chennai.7. 'Rockline' Venkatesh Producer ?. 'Linga' No.89 Rajkumar Street Bangalore City.8. B. Ponkumar 9. 'Abirami' Ramanathan President Tamil Nadu Theatre Owners Welfare Association Nadigar Sangam Buildings and Saligramam Sony Studios Habibullah Road T. Nagar Chennai. 10.K.S.Ravikumar Film Director 'Linga' 41 Kodambakkam High Road Chennai.11. Shi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated :20. 08.2015 RESERVED ON :31. 03.2015 DELIVERED ON :20. 08.2015 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.5200 of 2015 Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14908 of 2012 and Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14668 of 2012, 16107, 16108, 4774, 6597, 6595, 6596, 6410, 6430, 6681, 6682, 6683, 6436, 6438, 7581, 7595, 12970, 15862, 15863, 15864, 16484, 6667, 6668, 6669, 7268 of 2013, 22808, 22813, 5431, 22247 of 2014, 5200, 5201, 3316, 5146, 4521 and 3080 of 2015, 6206, 7644, 7481 & 7482 of 2013 Crl.O.P.(MD) No.5200 of 2015 1.P.K.M.Selvam S/o.P.K.Mookanambalam 2.S.Sankaranarayanan S/o.Shanmugam ... Petitioners/Accused 1 & 2 -Vs- 1.State through The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai. Crime No.12 of 2015 ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.C.Rathinavel, Tahsildhar, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai. ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto complainant Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to call for the records ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1998(1)CTC229
ORDER1. Both these Crl.O.P.Nos.5067 and 5068 of 1996, filled against C.C.Nos.2685 and 3661 of 1994, on the file of the disposed of by a common order, as the parties as well as the issue involved are one and the same in both these proceedings.2. The petitioners 1 and 2, the Company, as well as its Managing Director, having office at Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, approached the respondent, the complainant company, having its main office at Chamiers Road, Madras -18, and entered into an agreement on a hire purchase scheme, agreeing to pay the hire dues regularly as per the schedule for the purchase of redistillation plants.3. Towards the part settlement of hire dues, the petitioners issued two cheques on two different dates. One cheque dated 12.11.1993 for Rs.50,000drawn on Canara Bank, Diplomatic Enclave, New Delhi and another dated 17.3.1994 for Rs.2,81,000 drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad Pragati Vihar New Delhi. On due dates the complainant, presented the above cheques for encashment throu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1995CriLJ1303
ORDER1. Petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records in Cr. No. 1314/89 on the file of Central Crime Branch, Egmore and quash the proceedings therein. 2. Petitioner Ganesan is doing business in electronic goods in the name and style of Sivasakti Electronics at No. 23, Narasingapuram street, Mount Road, Madras. On 10-11-1989 he laid a complaint before the Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Madras against one Kasim, Ismail and Akbar alleging that on 7-10-1989 one Arumugam came to his shop and represented that TV picture tubes were available for sale at No. 48, Vaithinantha Mudali street, Mint, Madras. He also gave out that one Kasim, Ismail and Akbar are his partners. Pursuant to this, he proceeded to this shop along with one Srinivasan and another. He wanted to place the order for the picture tubes only on behalf of the said Srinivasan. In the house at Vaithianatha Mudali street, Arumugam introduced Kasim, Ismail and Akbar to him. He negotiated and fixed the price of 50 picture...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1959Mad185; 1959CriLJ608
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J. 1. These two cases have been directed to be posted before this Bench by the Honourable the Chief Justice on a reference by Somasundaram J., as to whether a servant selling goods on behalf of his master will fall primarily and directly within the scope of the penal provisions of Sections 7 and 16 of Act 37 of 1954, the Prevention of FoodAdulteration Act, as Somasundaram J., who had been prima facie, of the view that the servant wilt also be absolutely liable primarily and directly for the sale of adulterated food on behalf of the master in two cases decided by him, sitting singly, (Criminal Appeal Nos. 84 and 138 of 1957), both ex parte felt some doubt about the correctness of his view regarding the law, and wanted it to be clarified and settled by a Bench. 2. The facts in these two cases are briefly these: There is a Society called the Government Servants' Co-operative Society, Mettur Township, Salem District. The first accused, Moses, was the manager of the Co-o...
Tag this Judgment!