Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.31 seconds)
K.Krishnan vs The Commissioner on 7 February, 2020 cites

S. Bagirathi Ammal vs Palani Roman Catholic Mission on 6 December, 2007

In the case before the Honourable Supreme Court in S.Bagirathi Ammal V. Palani Roman Catholic Mission, referred supra, sale deed had been executed, but still, the Honourable Supreme Court, had held that since, the Amendment Act II of 1996 had come into force on 11.01.1996 and the sale deed was executed only on 28.10.1996, the fruits of the decree cannot be realized, in the instant case, the sale deed had not been executed. The writ petitioners herein stand on worse footing than the appellant S.Bagirathi Ammal in 2009 10 SCC 464. Therefore the petitioners cannot claim any relief, in view of the amendment brought by Act II of 1996 in Section 9 of the City Tenants Protection Act, 1921. Therefore, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No order as to costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 435 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

Arulmigu Kasi Viswanathaswamy ... vs Kasthuriammal on 7 April, 2006

23. Finally, Mr M.N. Krishnamani, placing reliance on the Full Bench decision of the Madras High Court rendered in CRP (NPD) No. 2758 of 1996 titled Arulmigu Kasi Viswanathaswamy 17/22 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.16264 of 2018 Devasthanam v. Kasthuriammal [(2006) 2 CTC 452 (Mad)] submitted that the moment tenant deposited the amount the order is fully satisfied. He further pointed out that as per the said decision the moment the order under Section 9(3)(a) is passed, it shall be construed that the proceedings got terminated and the suit stood dismissed as per Section 9(3)(b) of the Act. We are unable to accept the said proposition.
Madras High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 11 - M K Vinayagam - Full Document
1