Shankar Karikar Vs. M/s. Envee Enterprises by its Partner Sasikala Vamanan, Chennai and Others

Decided On : Dec-15-2016

Court : Chennai

LAW: Order VII Rule 1, Section 92, the Indian Evidence Act

ORG: CPC, Order IV Rule 1, Defendants, Rs.52,34,750/-, Defendants, Plaintiff, New Door No.23, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, Defendants, the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Plaintiff, NABARD, Defendants, Respondents, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, p.a, Plaintiff, Writ Petition, WP.549 of 2007, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, the Appellate Authority, Defendants, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, Defendants, Defendants, Plaintiff, the Inspector General of Registration, Plaintiff, Defendants, Doc, No.1074, the District Registrar Office, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, NABARD, Defendants, FSI, the Division Bench, NABARD, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, Rs.52,34,750/-, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, New Door No.23, Defendant Company, Defendants, Defendants, Doc, No.1074, the Sub Registrar, Thousand Lights, the Inspector General of Registration, Plaintiff, the Inspector General of Registration, the Inspector General of Registration, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, the Inspector General of Registration, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Corporation Bank, the Inspector General of Registration, Defendants, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Defendants, Defendants, Plaintiff, the Inspector General of Registration, Plaintiff, the Appellate Authority, the Station House Officer, Teynampet Police Station, Defendants, the Commissioner of Corporation of Chennai, CMDA, Defendants, Plaintiff, FSI, Defendants, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, NABARD, Defendants, NABARD, Plaintiff, CMDA, the Document No.1074, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, the Honourable High Court, the Collector of Chennai, Plaintiff, the Inspector General of Registration, the Appellate Authority, the Inspector General of Registration, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, Defendants, Defendant Company, Defendant Company, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, the Inspector General of Registration, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, Defendants, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, Plaintiff, the Inspector General of Registration, Plaintiff, the Registration Department, Plaintiff, the Inspector General of Registration, the Inspector General of Registration, Defendants, Plaintiff

CARDINAL: 1, 2, 2, 3, 9.8.2006, 2800, 3., 9.8.2006, 4, one, 21.2.1986, 5, 2, 3, 2.2.2009, 21.11.2007, 6., 7., 9.8.2006, 21.10.2003, 8, 2.2.2009, 9, 10, 11, 1, Rs.35,00,000/-, 2., 9.8.2006, 3., 21.10.2003, 4., 5, 12, 13, 14, 1):-, 3, 2800, 9.8.2006, 9.8.2006, 15, 16, 9.8.2006, 17, 11, 18, one, two, 19, 21.2.1986, 20, 8.1.2007, 2800, 22, 2.7.2009, 23, 24, 25, 8.7.2014, 26, 1, 27, 2, 1.25, 2, 3, 28, 4, 5):-, 29

PERCENT: 18%, 18%, 18%, 18%

PERSON: b., Mylapore, Exs, G.Sumitra, V.Raghavachari, Document No.1074/2003, no.738752, P2, Ex, D3, Madras, Ex, Ex

FAC: Centoph Road, Centoph Road

DATE: Rs.1,25,00,000/-, a period one month, 21.10.2003, December 2006, 30.12.2006, 2007, 28.3.2007, 21.10.2003, 13.2.2009, 21.10.2003, 21.10.2003, 2003, 9.8.2006., 2007, 21.11.2007, 2008, 2.7.2008, 13.2.2009, 1990, 14.12.2011, 2003, 23.7.2003, 1990, 21.10.2003, a period of, one month, 30.12.2006, 2007, 2007, the 1st, MP.No.1 of 2007, 2007, 2007, 21.2.1986, 21, 13.2.2009, 2007, 21.11.2007, 2003, 21.10.2003, 10.6.2006, August 15, 2006, a later date, three months

PRODUCT: Rs.25, J.Subramaniam, Rs.25, Rs.25, Rs.25, Rs.25

LOC: Plaintiff, Plaintiff, South West, North East, Plaintiff

ORDINAL: third, 1st, 2nd, first, 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd, second

GPE: p.a., Ex, Ex

NORP: J.Subramanian, Rs.25