Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.25 seconds)
N.Palaniappan vs The Director Of Medical Education on 5 April, 2019 cites

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation ... vs P.Karuppusamy on 23 November, 2007

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the instant issue is covered by a Division Bench judgment of this Court http://www.judis.nic.inin the case of Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation Vs. 3 P.Karuppasamy reported in 2008 3 L.W.90. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment referred to the learned counsel for the petitioner are reproduced here under.
Madras High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 16 - S Palanivelu - Full Document

Venkatappa @ Moode (D) By Lrs vs M. Abdul Jabbar & Ors on 24 February, 2006

24.The principles laid down in the aforestated rulings are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. The appellant Corporation, having taken a plea that the driver of the bus was not responsible for the accident, could not turn around to say that he was responsible for the accident. As such, it is very much bound by the pleadings raised by it before the Tribunals and this Court. The law is well settled as to the aspect that the standard of proof in both the proceedings before the criminal court and the domestic enquiry officer are entirely different. However, since the Corporation has consciously raised the contention in favour of the bus driver before the judicial fora, it is precluded from http://www.judis.nic.in proceeding against him in departmental proceedings.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 8 - Full Document
1