வைகோ நீதிமன்றத்துக்கு வந்துவிட்டார்.
வைகோ நீதிமன்றத்துக்கு வந்துவிட்டார்.
Follow:
- Next story Today item.3 pvj bench orders add pp damodaran [16/02, 10:16] Sekarreporter: .. [16/02, 11:19] Sekarreporter: All the respondents/accused appeared before the Hon’ble Court. Upon hearing the parties, the Hon’ble Court declined to suspend the sentence and ordered that the respondents be committed to prison immediately.
- Previous story PIL plea is expected to be listed for hearing before the first Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan this week. Seventy-one-year-old advocate T. Sivagnanasambandan of T. Nagar in Chennnai had filed the case through his counsel on record M.L. Ravi.
Recent Posts
- HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.(MD)No.11386 of 2026 Tamil Rajendiran @ R.Rajendiran .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Principal Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 3.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Madurai. 4.The Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple,
- HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI W.P.Crl.(MD)No.2270 of 2026 V.Malar … Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o/ Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN R.T.(MD).No.02 of 2026 and Crl.A.(MD).No.425 of 2026 R.T.(MD).No.02 of 2026: The State of Tamilnadu rep by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Valliyoor,
- In the present case, the scope of Section 41(1) of the Act read with Rule 25 of the Rules is crystal clear and therefore, the scope of exercising discretionary power by the High Court in condoning the delay beyond the period contemplated for preferring any appeal under the Act does not arise at all. 14. In view of the above legal position, the objection raised by the Registry is sustained and the S.T.A.SR.No.81961 of 2019 is rejected at the SR stage. Registry is directed to upload this order in the High Court web site and to report the same under neutral citation. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 16-04-2026
- Legal Representative Of Deceased Party Can Challenge Arbitral Award U/S.34 Arbitration Act and not under Article 227 of the Constitution/Section 115 of the CPC.” Supreme Court [22/04, 15:26] sekarreporter1: 2026 INSC 393 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No……………………. OF 2026 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 16162/2023) V.K. JOHN … APPELLANT(S) VERSUS S. MUKANCHAND BOTHRA AND HUF (DIED) REPRESENTED BY LRS. & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T SANJAY KAROL,J.
More
Recent Posts
- HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.(MD)No.11386 of 2026 Tamil Rajendiran @ R.Rajendiran .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Principal Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. 3.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Madurai. 4.The Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple,
- HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI W.P.Crl.(MD)No.2270 of 2026 V.Malar … Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o/ Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN R.T.(MD).No.02 of 2026 and Crl.A.(MD).No.425 of 2026 R.T.(MD).No.02 of 2026: The State of Tamilnadu rep by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Valliyoor,
- In the present case, the scope of Section 41(1) of the Act read with Rule 25 of the Rules is crystal clear and therefore, the scope of exercising discretionary power by the High Court in condoning the delay beyond the period contemplated for preferring any appeal under the Act does not arise at all. 14. In view of the above legal position, the objection raised by the Registry is sustained and the S.T.A.SR.No.81961 of 2019 is rejected at the SR stage. Registry is directed to upload this order in the High Court web site and to report the same under neutral citation. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 16-04-2026
- Legal Representative Of Deceased Party Can Challenge Arbitral Award U/S.34 Arbitration Act and not under Article 227 of the Constitution/Section 115 of the CPC.” Supreme Court [22/04, 15:26] sekarreporter1: 2026 INSC 393 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No……………………. OF 2026 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 16162/2023) V.K. JOHN … APPELLANT(S) VERSUS S. MUKANCHAND BOTHRA AND HUF (DIED) REPRESENTED BY LRS. & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T SANJAY KAROL,J.