Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 30 (0.61 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The Trade Unions Act, 1926
Section 9A in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors vs Chhabil Dass Agarwal on 8 August, 2013
3.Commissioner of Income Tax and Ors. v. Chhabil Dass
Agarwal, MANU/SC/0802/2013 : 2014 (1) SCC 603, as
follows:
Authorized Officer, State Bank Of ... vs Mathew K.C. on 30 January, 2018
4 . Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and Ors. vs.
Mathew K.C. (30.01.2018-SC): MANU/SC/0054/2018
The petitioner argued that the SARFAESI Act is a complete
code by itself, providing for expeditious recovery of dues
arising out of loans granted by financial institutions, the
remedy of appeal by the aggrieved under Section 17 before the
Debt Recovery Tribunal, followed by a right to appeal before
the Appellate Tribunal under Section 18. The High Court
ought not to have entertained the writ petition in view of the
adequate alternate statutory remedies available to the
22/40
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.19797 of 2017
Respondent. The interim order was passed on the very first
date, without an opportunity to the Appellant to file a reply.
United Bank Of India vs Satyawati Tondon & Ors on 26 July, 2010
Reliance was placed on United Bank of India vs. Satyawati
Tandon and others, MANU/SC/0541/2010 : 2010 (8) SCC 110
and General Manager, Sri Siddeshwara Cooperative Bank
Limited and another vs. Ikbal and others,
MANU/SC/0856/2013 : 2013 (10) SCC 83. The writ petition
ought to have been dismissed at the threshold on the ground of
maintainability. The Division Bench erred in declining to
interfere with the same. The Supreme Court agreed to the
arguments and held the same also noted that the writ petition
ought not to have been entertained and the interim order
granted for the mere asking without assigning special reasons
and that too without even granting opportunity to the
Appellant to contest the maintainability of the writ petition and
failure to notice the subsequent developments in the
interregnum.
Gm, Sri Siddeshwara Co-Op.Bank Ltd.& ... vs Sri Ikbal & Ors on 22 August, 2013
Reliance was placed on United Bank of India vs. Satyawati
Tandon and others, MANU/SC/0541/2010 : 2010 (8) SCC 110
and General Manager, Sri Siddeshwara Cooperative Bank
Limited and another vs. Ikbal and others,
MANU/SC/0856/2013 : 2013 (10) SCC 83. The writ petition
ought to have been dismissed at the threshold on the ground of
maintainability. The Division Bench erred in declining to
interfere with the same. The Supreme Court agreed to the
arguments and held the same also noted that the writ petition
ought not to have been entertained and the interim order
granted for the mere asking without assigning special reasons
and that too without even granting opportunity to the
Appellant to contest the maintainability of the writ petition and
failure to notice the subsequent developments in the
interregnum.