SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

SEKAR REPORTER Blog

Aag kummaresan filed report in police orderly case sm subrmaniyam passed direction again

Uncategorized

Aag kummaresan filed report in police orderly case sm subrmaniyam passed direction again

ஆர்டர்லி வைத்திருப்பதாக தகவலோ, புகாரோ வந்தால் நன்னடத்தை விதிகளின் கீழ் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட காவல்துறை உயர் அதிகாரி மீது உள்துறை முதன்மை செயலாளர் உடனடியாக நடவடிக்கை எடுக்க வேண்டுமென சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம் உத்தரவிட்டுள்ளது. காவல் துறையில் தற்போது பணியாற்றும் அதிகாரிகளும், ஓய்வுபெற்ற அதிகாரிகளும் ஆர்டர்லிகளை பயன்படுத்துவதற்கு எதிராக...

        S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)  No(s).  32709- 32710/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated  29.08.2018 in SCA No. 18433/2017 05-09-2018 in SCA No. 20185/2017 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad) UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                              Petitioner(s)                                 VERSUS

Uncategorized

        S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)  No(s).  32709- 32710/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated  29.08.2018 in SCA No. 18433/2017 05-09-2018 in SCA No. 20185/2017 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad) UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                              Petitioner(s)                                 VERSUS

ITEM NO.47               COURT NO.6               SECTION III S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal...

நீதிபதிகள் எஸ்.வைத்தியநாதன், ஏ.டி.ஜெகதீஸ்சந்திரா. சாட்சிகள் கொடுத்த வாக்குமூலத்தின் அடிப்படையில் மட்டுமே விசாரணை நீதிமன்றங்கள் தீர்ப்பளிக்க முடியாது என்று சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம் தெளிவுபடுத்தியுள்ளது.

Uncategorized

நீதிபதிகள் எஸ்.வைத்தியநாதன், ஏ.டி.ஜெகதீஸ்சந்திரா. சாட்சிகள் கொடுத்த வாக்குமூலத்தின் அடிப்படையில் மட்டுமே விசாரணை நீதிமன்றங்கள் தீர்ப்பளிக்க முடியாது என்று சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம் தெளிவுபடுத்தியுள்ளது.

சென்னை, ஜூலை 24: சாட்சிகள் கொடுத்த வாக்குமூலத்தின் அடிப்படையில் மட்டுமே விசாரணை நீதிமன்றங்கள் தீர்ப்பளிக்க முடியாது என்று சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றம் தெளிவுபடுத்தியுள்ளது. வேலூர் மாவட்டம் திருப்பார்குட்டை பகுதியை சேர்ந்தவர் சிவா. இவருக்கு ஏற்கனவே திருமணமாகி 3 பெண் குழந்தைகள் உள்ளனர். இந்த நிலையில் அதே பகுதியை...

Idol case and encouragement case rti case news

Uncategorized

Idol case and encouragement case rti case news

[7/23, 12:13] Sekarreporter1: காஞ்சிபுரம் ஏகாம்பரநாதர் கோவிலுக்கு சோம ஸ்கந்தர் சிலை செய்ததில் நடந்த முறைகேடு தொடர்பான வழக்கின் விசாரணையை, சிலை கடத்தல் தடுப்பு பிரிவிலிருந்து சிவகாஞ்சி போலீசாருக்கு மாற்றி சென்னை உயர்நீதிமன்றம் உத்தரவிட்டுள்ளது. காஞ்சிபுரம் ஏகாம்பரநாதர் கோவிலில் உள்ள ஆயிரம் ஆண்டுகள் பழமையான சோமாஸ்கந்தர் சிலையில்...

directing the District Collector, Tiruvannamalai, to expedite the proceedings and conclude the same at the earliest, so that if any encroachment is found, necessary action may be taken, and if the result of the inquiry shows no encroachment, then respondents 2 and 3 can maintain the construction. In the proceeding, if the petitioner wishes, he can also participate, and the District Collector is directed to give such permission. There will be no order as to costs. (M.N.B., CJ.) (N.M., J.). Gp muthukumar

Uncategorized

directing the District Collector, Tiruvannamalai, to expedite the proceedings and conclude the same at the earliest, so that if any encroachment is found, necessary action may be taken, and if the result of the inquiry shows no encroachment, then respondents 2 and 3 can maintain the construction. In the proceeding, if the petitioner wishes, he can also participate, and the District Collector is directed to give such permission. There will be no order as to costs. (M.N.B., CJ.) (N.M., J.). Gp muthukumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.07.2022 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA W.P.Nos.18470, 18474, 18477, 18480 of 2022 A.Ezhumalai .. Petitioner vs...

JUSTICE MR.N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.No.21018 of 2015 and MP.No.1 of 2015 Mr.P.Adhavan Seral .In view of the above discussion, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the decision taken by the respondents in denying the issuance of the copy of the certificates of the candidates, who have registered themselves under the “Inter-Caste Marriage” category. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Balamurugan For Respondents : Mr.Niranjan Ragagopalan for R1 Mr.C.Sathish Government Advocate for R2 and R3 ORDER

Uncategorized

JUSTICE MR.N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.No.21018 of 2015 and MP.No.1 of 2015 Mr.P.Adhavan Seral .In view of the above discussion, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the decision taken by the respondents in denying the issuance of the copy of the certificates of the candidates, who have registered themselves under the “Inter-Caste Marriage” category. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Balamurugan For Respondents : Mr.Niranjan Ragagopalan for R1 Mr.C.Sathish Government Advocate for R2 and R3 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS ORDERS RESERVED ON : 14.07.2022 PRONOUNCING ORDERS ON : 18.07.2022 Coram: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MR.N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.No.21018 of 2015 and MP.No.1 of 2015 Mr.P.Adhavan Seral ..Petitioner...

THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Crl.O.P.Nos.28016 of 2017, 6069 of 2019, 22792 & 22793 of 2019 & Crl.M.P.Nos.15938 & 15939 of 2017, 3385, 11887, 11889 of 2019 Crl.O.P.No.28016 of 2017 The re-investigation of the case shall be completed within a period of 90 days, from the date of receipt of the order, and final report shall be filed before the Judicial Magistrate-I, Kanchipuram, who ordered the investigation. For Petitioner : Mr.P.L.Narayanan For R1 : Mr.R.Muniapparaj, Additional Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mr.N.S.Suganthan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 Crl.O.P.No.6069 of 2019

Uncategorized

THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Crl.O.P.Nos.28016 of 2017, 6069 of 2019, 22792 & 22793 of 2019 & Crl.M.P.Nos.15938 & 15939 of 2017, 3385, 11887, 11889 of 2019 Crl.O.P.No.28016 of 2017 The re-investigation of the case shall be completed within a period of 90 days, from the date of receipt of the order, and final report shall be filed before the Judicial Magistrate-I, Kanchipuram, who ordered the investigation. For Petitioner : Mr.P.L.Narayanan For R1 : Mr.R.Muniapparaj, Additional Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mr.N.S.Suganthan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 Crl.O.P.No.6069 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on : 13.07.2022 Pronounced on : 22.07.2022 Coram:: THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Crl.O.P.Nos.28016 of 2017, 6069 of 2019, 22792 & 22793 of 2019 &...

MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Criminal Appeal No.642 of 2018 Siva vs. n view of the above, the judgment of conviction and sentence rendered by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vellore made in S.C.No.90 of 2017 dated 11.9.2018 is set aside and the appellant is acquitted of all the charges. The appellant is set at liberty. Bail bond executed, if any, shall stand cancelled. Fine amount paid, if any, shall be refunded to the appellant. (S.V.N.,J.) (A.D.J.C.,J.) 22.7.2022.add pp babu muthu meeran vehumently opposed

Uncategorized

MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Criminal Appeal No.642 of 2018 Siva vs. n view of the above, the judgment of conviction and sentence rendered by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vellore made in S.C.No.90 of 2017 dated 11.9.2018 is set aside and the appellant is acquitted of all the charges. The appellant is set at liberty. Bail bond executed, if any, shall stand cancelled. Fine amount paid, if any, shall be refunded to the appellant. (S.V.N.,J.) (A.D.J.C.,J.) 22.7.2022.add pp babu muthu meeran vehumently opposed

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on : 12.7.2022 Delivered on : 22.7.2022 CORAM THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Criminal Appeal No.642 of 2018 Siva vs....

In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed and there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to pay a compensation of Rs.5 Lakhs (Rupees Five Lakhs only) to the petitioner within a period of six weeks judge Anath venkadesh. For Petitioner : Ms.Poongkhulali for Mrs.D.Geetha For Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate for R1 & R2 Mr.N.Damodaran for R3 ORDER

Uncategorized

In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed and there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to pay a compensation of Rs.5 Lakhs (Rupees Five Lakhs only) to the petitioner within a period of six weeks judge Anath venkadesh. For Petitioner : Ms.Poongkhulali for Mrs.D.Geetha For Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate for R1 & R2 Mr.N.Damodaran for R3 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS ORDERS RESERVED ON : 20.07.2022 PRONOUNCING ORDERS ON : 22.07.2022 Coram: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MR.N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.No.26460 of 2007 S.Bhanupriya ..Petitioner .Vs. 1.The State of Tamilnadu...