SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

SEKAR REPORTER Blog

8.In this matter grant or not to grant permission, discretion is left to the respondent police by exercising the discretionary power and based upon the situations, the respondent police rejected the petitioner’s request on 26.10.022. Therefore, I find no willful disobedience of this Court order. Hence, I find no reason to take action on the contempt petition. Hence, dismissed. Consequently, connected sub application is closed. Index     : Yes/No          07.12.2022 Internet  : Yes/No sms To Bala Krishnan, I.P.S. The Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore. Badrinarayanan, I.P.S.     The Superintendent of Police,     Coimbatore District,     Coimbatore. 3.The Public Prosecutor,    High Court, Madras. V.SIVAGNANAM ,J. sms pre-delivery order made in Cont.P.No.2351 of 2022 and Sub Appl.No.627 of 2022 07.12.2022  of 10

Uncategorized

 by · Published December 9, 2022

8.In this matter grant or not to grant permission, discretion is left to the respondent police by exercising the discretionary power and based upon the situations, the respondent police rejected the petitioner’s request on 26.10.022. Therefore, I find no willful disobedience of this Court order. Hence, I find no reason to take action on the contempt petition. Hence, dismissed. Consequently, connected sub application is closed. Index     : Yes/No          07.12.2022 Internet  : Yes/No sms To Bala Krishnan, I.P.S. The Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore. Badrinarayanan, I.P.S.     The Superintendent of Police,     Coimbatore District,     Coimbatore. 3.The Public Prosecutor,    High Court, Madras. V.SIVAGNANAM ,J. sms pre-delivery order made in Cont.P.No.2351 of 2022 and Sub Appl.No.627 of 2022 07.12.2022  of 10

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS               RESERVED ON       :      16.11.2022     PRONOUNCED ON:      07.12.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM Cont.P.No.2351 of 2022 and Sub Appl.No.627 of 2022 S.Kalyani                                       …         ...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Madras high court december 8 order

Uncategorized

 by · Published December 9, 2022

Madras high court december 8 order

[12/7, 16:46] Sekarreporter 1: புதிதாக வாங்கிய டிவி ஒரு வாரத்தில் பழுதானதால் மன உளைச்சலுக்கு ஆளானவருக்கு ஒரு லட்ச ரூபாய் இழப்பீடு வழங்க வேண்டுமென ரிலையன்ஸ் ரீட்டெய்ல் மற்றும் பிலிப்ஸ் டிவி நிறுவனங்களுக்கு நுகர்வோர் நீதிமன்றம் உத்தரவிட்டுள்ளது. சென்னை ராஜ அண்ணாமலைபுரத்தைச் சேர்ந்த வழக்கறிஞரான கே.செல்வக்குமாரசாமி...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
This Court while hearing the appeal on 07.11.2022, revokedthe order of suspension of sentence already granted by this Court on 04.03.2022 and directed the second respondent/Police to secure the appellant and produce him before this Court today i.e. on 18.11.2022. As directed, the respondent/Police produced the accused before this Court today and after hearing arguments advanced on either side, this Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence of the trial Court. The accused was earlier confined in Central Prison, Coimbatore. At the request of the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant is directed to be detained in Central Prison, Madurai, since his native place is Usilampatty, Madurai District. The appellant/ accused  shall undergo the remaining period of sentence, if any, and the same shall be set-off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. 18.11.2022 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order ms To 1.The Sessions Judge,    Mahalir Neethimandram    (Fast Track Mahila Court)    Tiruppur. 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,    North Range,    Tiruppur. 3.The Inspector of Police,    North Police Station,    Tiruppur. 4.The Superintendent,    Central Prison,    Madurai. 5.The Superintendent,    Central Prison,    Coimbatore. 6.The Public Prosecutor,    High Court, Madras. 7.The Deputy Registrar | with a direction to send back the    (Criminal Section),              | original records, if any, to the    High Court, Madras.               | trial Court P.VELMURUGAN, J. ms CRL.A.No.627 of 2021 18.11.2022

Uncategorized

 by · Published December 9, 2022

This Court while hearing the appeal on 07.11.2022, revokedthe order of suspension of sentence already granted by this Court on 04.03.2022 and directed the second respondent/Police to secure the appellant and produce him before this Court today i.e. on 18.11.2022. As directed, the respondent/Police produced the accused before this Court today and after hearing arguments advanced on either side, this Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence of the trial Court. The accused was earlier confined in Central Prison, Coimbatore. At the request of the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant is directed to be detained in Central Prison, Madurai, since his native place is Usilampatty, Madurai District. The appellant/ accused  shall undergo the remaining period of sentence, if any, and the same shall be set-off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. 18.11.2022 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order ms To 1.The Sessions Judge,    Mahalir Neethimandram    (Fast Track Mahila Court)    Tiruppur. 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,    North Range,    Tiruppur. 3.The Inspector of Police,    North Police Station,    Tiruppur. 4.The Superintendent,    Central Prison,    Madurai. 5.The Superintendent,    Central Prison,    Coimbatore. 6.The Public Prosecutor,    High Court, Madras. 7.The Deputy Registrar | with a direction to send back the    (Criminal Section),              | original records, if any, to the    High Court, Madras.               | trial Court P.VELMURUGAN, J. ms CRL.A.No.627 of 2021 18.11.2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.11.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN CRL.A.No.627 of 2021 Ravi @ Virumandi        .. Appellant .Vs. 1.State represented by: The Assistant Commissioner of Police,   ...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
A.No.4446 of 2022 in O.P.No.793 of 2018 C.             V.KARTHIKEYAN,J., This application has been filed by a third party to O.P.No.793 of 2018, Karunyam Mission (Trust), represented by its Trustee, Brother. therefore direct the Joint Registrar, Original Side of this Court, to lodge necessary criminal complaint against the deponent of the affidavit, C.Doss, son of R.Chandran, Christian, aged about 51 years, having office at No.13, Zion Nagar,Pattamandri, N.C.T.P.S Post, Chennai 600 120, for presenting an affidavit which is evidently false and trying to influence the flow of administration of justice of this Court. C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J., ssi Necessary complaint should be lodged before the jurisdictional Police for necessary action in manner known to law. This petition stands dismissed. No costs. 09.11.2022 ssi A.No.4446 of 2022 in O.P.No.793 of 2018

Uncategorized

 by · Published December 9, 2022

A.No.4446 of 2022 in O.P.No.793 of 2018 C.             V.KARTHIKEYAN,J., This application has been filed by a third party to O.P.No.793 of 2018, Karunyam Mission (Trust), represented by its Trustee, Brother. therefore direct the Joint Registrar, Original Side of this Court, to lodge necessary criminal complaint against the deponent of the affidavit, C.Doss, son of R.Chandran, Christian, aged about 51 years, having office at No.13, Zion Nagar,Pattamandri, N.C.T.P.S Post, Chennai 600 120, for presenting an affidavit which is evidently false and trying to influence the flow of administration of justice of this Court. C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J., ssi Necessary complaint should be lodged before the jurisdictional Police for necessary action in manner known to law. This petition stands dismissed. No costs. 09.11.2022 ssi A.No.4446 of 2022 in O.P.No.793 of 2018

A.No.4446 of 2022 in O.P.No.793 of 2018 C.             V.KARTHIKEYAN,J., This application has been filed by a third party to O.P.No.793 of 2018, Karunyam Mission (Trust), represented by its Trustee, Brother C.Doss, having office at...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
கோயில்களில் ஆகமவிதிகளை கண்டறிவது தொடர்பாக இந்து சமய அறநிலையத்துறை அனுப்பிய சுற்றறிக்கைக்கு ஐகோர்ட் தடை விதித்துள்ளது.* for temple adv valliappan

Uncategorized

 by · Published December 8, 2022

கோயில்களில் ஆகமவிதிகளை கண்டறிவது தொடர்பாக இந்து சமய அறநிலையத்துறை அனுப்பிய சுற்றறிக்கைக்கு ஐகோர்ட் தடை விதித்துள்ளது.* for temple adv valliappan

*கோயில்களில் ஆகமவிதிகளை கண்டறிவது தொடர்பாக இந்து சமய அறநிலையத்துறை அனுப்பிய சுற்றறிக்கைக்கு ஐகோர்ட் தடை விதித்துள்ளது.* அறநிலையத்துறை உயர்மட்ட ஆலோசனை குழு உறுப்பினர் சத்தியவேல் முருகன் 50 கேள்விகளுடன் சுற்றறிக்கை தயாரித்திருந்தார். 50 கேள்விகளுக்கும் விடையளிக்க அறநிலையத்துறை அனைத்து கோயில்களுக்கும் சுற்றறிக்கை அனுப்பியது. திரு.சத்திய வேல் முருகன்...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Retrieval of property belongs to dharmapuram aadheenam. THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD W.P.(MD)No.22574 of 2022 P.Markandan .. Petitioner Versus 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesh For Respondents : Mr.R.Subbaraj, SGP for R1 to R3 & R8 Mr.M.Muthugeethayan Standing Counsel for R4 Mr.M.Karthikeyan for R5 Mr.Thilak Kumar, Government Pleader for R6 & R9 Mr. N.Anandakumar for R7 O R D E R R. MAHADEVAN, J.

Uncategorized

 by · Published December 8, 2022

Retrieval of property belongs to dharmapuram aadheenam. THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD W.P.(MD)No.22574 of 2022 P.Markandan .. Petitioner Versus 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesh For Respondents : Mr.R.Subbaraj, SGP for R1 to R3 & R8 Mr.M.Muthugeethayan Standing Counsel for R4 Mr.M.Karthikeyan for R5 Mr.Thilak Kumar, Government Pleader for R6 & R9 Mr. N.Anandakumar for R7 O R D E R R. MAHADEVAN, J.

Retrieval of property belongs to dharmapuram aadheenam. THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD W.P.(MD)No.22574 of 2022 P.Markandan .. Petitioner Versus 1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Petitioner...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Orders reserved Sekarreporter 1: https://youtu.be/Us1uMvwBEC4 [12/8, 14:12] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:40] Rajalashmi Admk: ஜல்லிகட்டு வழக்கில் மான்புமிகு முன்னாள் முதல்வர் ஜல்லிகட்டு நாயகன் திரு. ஓ.பன்னீர்செல்வம் மற்றும் அவரது மகன் அவர்கள் சார்பாக உச்சநீதிமன்றத்தில் ஜல்லிகட்டுக்கு ஆதரவாக எடுத்து வைக்கப்பட்ட வாதங்கள் [12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: 👍👍 [12/8, 12:57] Sekarreporter 1: Brief Note of Submissions on behalf of Thiru O.Panneerselvam and Thiru P. Ravindranath in the Supreme Court Batch of Cases relating to Jallikattu

Uncategorized

 by · Published December 8, 2022

Orders reserved Sekarreporter 1: https://youtu.be/Us1uMvwBEC4 [12/8, 14:12] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:40] Rajalashmi Admk: ஜல்லிகட்டு வழக்கில் மான்புமிகு முன்னாள் முதல்வர் ஜல்லிகட்டு நாயகன் திரு. ஓ.பன்னீர்செல்வம் மற்றும் அவரது மகன் அவர்கள் சார்பாக உச்சநீதிமன்றத்தில் ஜல்லிகட்டுக்கு ஆதரவாக எடுத்து வைக்கப்பட்ட வாதங்கள் [12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: 👍👍 [12/8, 12:57] Sekarreporter 1: Brief Note of Submissions on behalf of Thiru O.Panneerselvam and Thiru P. Ravindranath in the Supreme Court Batch of Cases relating to Jallikattu

[12/8, 14:11] Sekarreporter 1: https://youtu.be/Us1uMvwBEC4 [12/8, 14:12] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:40] Rajalashmi Admk: ஜல்லிகட்டு வழக்கில் மான்புமிகு முன்னாள் முதல்வர் ஜல்லிகட்டு நாயகன் திரு. ஓ.பன்னீர்செல்வம் மற்றும் அவரது மகன் அவர்கள் சார்பாக உச்சநீதிமன்றத்தில் ஜல்லிகட்டுக்கு ஆதரவாக...

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Exit mobile version