C.P.Kuppan vs Thiru.Vadamalai. Subramani
Judges:
16 March, 2017·When the Second Appeal came up for hearing on 09.03.2017, there was no representation for the appellants, and hence, it was directed to be listed under the caption "for dismissal" today (16.03.2017). Even today, there is no representation for the appellants. Hence, the Second Appeal is dismissed for...
Madras High Court
M.Jayanthi vs The Commissioner Of Tourism
Judges:
16 March, 2017·This Writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records pertaining to the impugned memo, dated 20.02.2017, issued by the second respondent herein and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural Just...
Madras High Court
S.Sushil Kumar vs The District Collector
Judges:
16 March, 2017·By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Mr.Era.Premnath, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2 The petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner of the properties admeasuring to an extent of 270 Feet East West and 71 feet North-South, situ...
Madras High Court
Masutha Ammal vs State Rep. By
Judges:
16 March, 2017·Seeking a direction to the respondent police to complete the investigation and to file a final report in Crime No.265 of 2016 before the concerned forum, the petitioner has come up with this petition.2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitt...
Madras High Court
T.Rajaraman vs State Express Transport ...
Judges:
16 March, 2017·This Writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to revise the petitioner's pay for the period from 01.09.2013 to 28.02.2015 based on the terms of settlement, dated 13.04.2015 entered under Section12(3) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947...
Madras High Court
Adyar Kanagaraj Dhareswaraj vs The Commissioner
Judges:
16 March, 2017·The petitioners, in order to get a declaration that they are the hereditary trustees of Arulmigu Ponniamman, Mariamman and Valleswarar Temple situated in Urur, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020, had filed an application in O.A. No. 8/2014 on the file of the 2nd respondent and since the said application has n...
Madras High Court
Tamil Nadu State Transport ... vs A.Chandru(Minor)
Judges:
16 March, 2017·Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal, in M.C.O.P.No.4127 of 2005, on 07.02.2014, the Transport Corporation has come forward with this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.2. The claimant A.Chandru who was aged 12 years,a seventh standard student, met with an accident that occ...
Madras High Court
Ananthakumar vs Parthasarathy
Judges:
16 March, 2017·For the sake of convenience, the parties should be referred to as complainant and accused.2. It is the case of the complainant that they are doing a chit business and the accused had joined a chit and had taken Rs.16,80,150/-, for which, the accused had given a cheque dated 03.11.2016, which, when p...
Madras High Court
Venkatalakshmi vs The Managing Director
Judges:
16 March, 2017·Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, in M.C.O.P.No.447 of 2012, on 18.03.2014, the claimants have come forward with this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal for enhancement of compensation.2. One Pandiayaraju, who was the husband of the first claimant, fathe...
Madras High Court
C.Jegan vs T.C.Amarnath
Judges:
16 March, 2017·When this Court was about to dismiss this petition on merits, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition with liberty to raise all the points before the Trial Court and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.2. Permission is granted. This ...
Madras High Court
Don’t wait for legal issues to escalate
By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, Refund Policy and Content Policies. © 2023 - Uber9 Business Process Services Private Limited. All rights reserved.