Court : Chennai Madurai
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pursuant to the impugned order passed by the fifth respondent in Proceedings dated 14.08.2012 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to permit the petitioner Bar Association to conduct a rally and Meeting on 17.08.2012 or any other subsequent date in Srivilliputhur Town, Virudhunagar District as mentioned in the representation dated 13.08.2012.) ORDER 1. The petitioner in this writ petition is Srivilliputhur Bar Association represented by its Secretary. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the fifth respondent namely the Inspector of Police, Krishnankovil Police Station, in charge of Srivilliputhur Town Police Station, Srivilliputhur, dated 14.08.2012. 3. It transpires that the petitioner Bar Association sent a letter dated 13.08.2012 to the fifth respondent asking permission ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
(Prayer:Appeal is filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the Judgment and conviction dated 11.01.2012 made in S.C.No.78 of 2011, on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge [Fast Track Court No.III], Tirunelveli.) S. Nagamuthu, J. The appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.78 of 2011, on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge [Fast Track Court No.III], Tirunelveli. The second accused in the case was one Mr.S.Iyyappan, who is the son of the first accused. The Trial Court framed as many as two charges as detailed below. ChargeAccused Penal Provisions11302 IPC22302 r/w 109 IPC By Judgment dated 11.01.2012, the Trial Court has acquitted the second accused, but convicted the first accused, as detailed below:- Convicted under Sections Sentence imposedFine amount302 IPCTo undergo imprisonment for lifeRs.10,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. As against the said conviction and sentence, the appellant has come up w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
(Prayer: Habeas Corpus Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce the body and person of petitioner's daughter, aged 10 years (at the time of missing aged 4 days), daughter of Muthumanickam, before this Court and set her at liberty and handed over the custody to the petitioner and pass such further or other orders.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The petitioner, Mrs.Mareeswari, is a differently abled woman, hardly aged 31 years. She is a visually challenged woman, having lost her vision after she had just completed her +2 Examinations. Her husband, Mr.Muthumanickam, is also a differently abled person, having total loss of vision by birth. But, still, they have not lost the hope of their future. They married in the year 2005. Out of the said wedlock, the petitioner became pregnant and she was admitted as inpatient at the Madurai Government Rajaji Hospital, on 05.01.2006, for delivery of the child. O...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
(Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of CertiorarifiedMandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings passed by the 4th respondent in No.MSU/CoE/November 2015 dated 07.10.2015 and quash the same and further directing the 3rd respondent University to grant affiliation to the petitioner Arts and Science College viz. Dr. Noble Christian College of Arts and Science for the courses B.Sc. Mathematics, B.A. English and B.Com.) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this court to withdraw this Writ Petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
(Prayers in Crl.O.P.(MD)1785/2016: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the Juvenile Justice Board, Sivagangai to accept the surrender of the petitioner in connection with the Crime No.644 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and to consider and pass orders in the bail application on the same day on surrender. Prayer in Crl.O.P.(MD)1941/2016: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Thoothukudi to consider the petitioner's bail application and dispose of the bail application on the same day, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Thoothukudi in Crime No.25 of 2016 on the file of the respondent. Crl.O.P.(MD)2073/2016: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the Juvenile Justice Board, Tuticorin to accept the surrender of the petitioner and consider the bail application on merits on the da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
(Prayer: Criminal Appeals are filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the Judgment dated 29.10.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.18 of 2010 by the First Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai.) Common Judgment A. Selvam, J. 1. These Criminal Appeals have been directed against the convictions and sentences dated 29.10.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.18 of 2010 by the First Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai. 2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous animosity on 03.05.2009 at about 07.40 p.m., in Nehru Nagar, Vilangudi in front of the house of one Periyasamy, the second accused has abetted the first accused to murder the deceased by name Karuppasamy. The first accused has tried to attack the deceased Karuppasamy and at that time one Muthu has tried to deter him, but the second accused has caught hold of him. The first accused has attacked one Bhuvaneswari and thereby caused injury on her person. During the course of occur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the order passed by the 1st respondent Tribunal dated 11.02.2016 in I.A.No.321 of 2016 in S.A.No.54 of 2016 in so far as the conditional order to pay Rs.40 lakhs in two installments and quash the same.) S. Manikumar, J. 1. Challenge in this writ petition, is to an order, made in I.A.No.321 of 2016 in S.A.No.54 of 2016, dated 11.02.2016, on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai, by which, the Tribunal has granted stay of confirmation of the sale fixed on 12.02.2016, subject to the condition that the writ petitioner has to make payment of Rs.20,00,000/- to the 2nd respondent/Bank, directly on or before 11.03.2016, as first installment and another payment of Rs.20,00,000/- as the second installment on or before 11.04.2016. 2. Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai, has also made it clear that in the event of failure to make single payment, ad-interi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
S. Manikumar, J. 1. A retired I.A. and A.S. Officer, has sought for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash R.O.C.No.C3/26037/15, dated 02.03.2016 and consequently, prayed for a direction to the District Collector, Kanyakumari District to demolish the construction made in Survey No.174/9, Kottaram West Village, Agasteeswaram Taluk, by respondents 3 to 5. He has also prayed for a direction to the District Collector and Superintendent of Police, respectively of Kanyakumari District, to remove the construction in Survey No.174/9, within a time frame. 2. According to the petitioner, he is native of Achankulam. Now, he is settled in Chennai and often, visit his native place, for his personal work. There is a temple called, ?Arulmighu Umayamman Temple? in Achankukalm. It is in Survey No.174/7. The village consists of Scheduled Caste Hindus, Nadars and Christians. There is a vacant place in Survey No.174/9, situated behind the said temple. East of that property, after the road, lies a CSI...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
Common Judgment: V. Ramasubramanian, J. History will find greatness in Felix Frankfurter as a justice, not because of the results he reached, but because of his attitude toward the process of decision. His guiding lights were detachment, rigorous integrity in dealing with the facts of a case, refusal to resort to unworthy means, no matter how noble the end and dedication to the Court as an institution. Because he was human, Justice Frankfurter did not always live up to his own ideal. But, he taught us the lesson that there is importance in the process (New York Times Editorial The Frankfurter Legacy, on September 2, 1962). 1. A very recent decision of the Supreme Court in Joint Secretary, Political Department, Government of Meghalaya, Main Secretariat, Shillong Vs. High Court of Meghalaya through its Registrar, Shillong [Civil Appeal No. 2987 of 2016 dated 18.3.2016] began with the above quote. In the said decision, the Supreme court reminded all the Judges of this country about th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai Madurai
(Prayer: APPEALS under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 26.11.2015 made in W.P.(MD)No.20559 of 2015.) V. Ramasubramanian,J : History will find greatness in Felix Frankfurter as a justice, not because of the results he reached, but because of his attitude toward the process of decision. His guiding lights were detachment, rigorous integrity in dealing with the facts of a case, refusal to resort to unworthy means, no matter how noble the end and dedication to the Court as an institution. Because he was human, Justice Frankfurter did not always live up to his own ideal. But, he taught us the lesson that there is importance in the process (New York Times Editorial The Frankfurter Legacy, on September 2, 1962). 1. A very recent decision of the Supreme Court in Joint Secretary, Political Department, Government of Meghalaya, Main Secretariat, Shillong Vs. High Court of Meghalaya through its Registrar, Shillong [Civil Appeal No. 2987 of 2016 dated 18.3.2016] began w...
Tag this Judgment!