Chidambaram vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 5 September, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIR 2019 SUPREME COURT 4198, 2019 (9) SCC 24, AIRONLINE ... Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.7523 of 2019)
P. CHIDAMBARAM ...Appellant
VERSUS
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT …Respondent
JUDGMENT
R. BANUMATHI, J.
Leave granted.
2. This
grant of two stage carriage permits for the route Madras
to Chidambaram. A large number of applications were
received. The authority granted the first permit ... round the
fact whether the respondent No. 1 had a workshop at
Chidambaram, one of the two terminii of the route and that
the tribunal
Parekh, D.Y.
Chandrachud and Ms. Shalini Soni for the Appellant.
P. Chidambaram, Arun Jaitley, I.R. Joshi, M.N. Shroof,
Ms. Indu Malhotra ... mere corrections as is sought to be
made out by Sri Chidambaram, the learned counsel for the
respondents. We have no manner of doubt that
Chidambaram vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 22 October, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIR 2019 SUPREME COURT 5272, AIRONLINE ... Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.9269 of 2019)
SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM ...Appellant
VERSUS
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION …Respondent
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras vs R.M. Chidambaram Pillai Etc on 17 November, 1976
Equivalent citations ... Khanna
PETITIONER:
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADRAS
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
R.M. CHIDAMBARAM PILLAI ETC.
DATE OF JUDGMENT17/11/1976
BENCH:
KRISHNAIYER, V.R.
BENCH
that the
two roommates of the respondent, viz., Raja Chidambaram
[PW-37] & Shagir Thabris [PW-38] have not stated that they
smelled any blood ... accused proceeded to Madras on 06.11.1996 at 9.00 p.m. from
Chidambaram railway station, albeit he submitted that accused
took train at Chidambaram
offences alleged against
him, but for the active connivance of Shri P. Chidambaram, the then Finance
Minister. So far as the various charges were concerned ... alleged
that both Shri A. Raja and Shri P. Chidambaram were jointly and severely
responsible. Reference was also made to documents including
appearing for
the defendant nos. 9 to 12 adopted his submissions.
Mr.Chidambaram made submissions on behalf of the
defendant no.1 which were adopted ... malafides, we must take
note of a preliminary objection raised by Mr.
Chidambaram that the arguments based on malafides
are really in substance allegation
most illuminating and lucid
submissions of the learned Senior Advocates Shri P.
Chidambaram, for the appellant and Shri Ashok H. Desai, for
the respondent ... foreign judgment in the Andhra Pradesh High Court stands
contradicted by Mr. Chidambaram on two specific counts.
The same being on the first count
Meyyappa Chettiar vs Chidambaram Chettiar on 17 December, 1923
Equivalent citations: 79IND. CAS.144, (1924)46MLJ415
JUDGMENT
Walter Salis Schwabe
