decided to proceed with disciplinary proceedings and one Sri. J. Hariharan was appointed vide order dated September 12, 1986 as the Enquiry Officer ... Karnataka High Court against the conduct of the enquiry by J. Hariharan. While the matter was pending before the Karnataka High Court another enquiry officer
Arunkumar,
for RR-5 and 6
: Mr.J.Hariharan,
for Mr.V.Nicholos, for R7
JUDGMENT
A. The Appeal Suit :
This Appeal Suit is filed ... Counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondents 5 and 6; Mr.J.Hariharan, learned
Counsel appearing on behalf of the seventh respondent
have such
enterprise.
17. In Union of India Vs. P.V.Hariharan, J.T. 1997 (3) 569 the
Supreme Court observed that the Tribunals
inter alia specifically averred that he has two sons J.Hariharan and J.Kirupakaran, both of them married and living with him and that
Karur Vysya Bank Ltd.,
rep. by its Deputy General Manager
Mr.J.Hariharan,
Divisional Office
KVB Towers (I floor)
No.568, Anna Salai
Teynampet, Chennai
Special Court, Krishnagiri.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Mani
For Respondents : Mr.J.Hariharan (for R1)
for Mr.V.Nicholas
Mr.S.P.Yuvankumar ... Mani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.J.Hariharan for Mr.V.Nicholas, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent
file of the Sub Court,
Dharmapuri).
For Appellant : Mr.J.Ramakrishnan
For Respondent : Mr.J.Hariharan
for Mr.V.Nicholas ... JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.M.VELUMANI, J.)
The appellant / wife is challenging the order and decree of the
Family Court
concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ramesh,
Senior Counsel
For Mr.J.Hariharan
For R-1 : Mr.R.Sanjai Gandhi,
Government Advocate,
(Criminal Side ... Ramesh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.J.Hariharan,
learned counsel appearing for A2 and A3 would contend that both A2 and A3
were
Registrar of Co-operatives Societies (House building), Vellore.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Hariharan
For R1 : Mr.M.Venugopal
Special Govt.Pleader
Appellants :Mr.P.Valliappan
For Respondent :Mr.J.Hariharan for
Mr.V.Nicholas -----------
J U D G M E N T
The defendants ... documents have arrived at an erroneous conclusion .
9. Per contra, Mr.J.Hariharan, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that, on facts after
