Advanced Search Results

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd Vs. Ms Subhiksha Trading Services.

Court : Chennai

Subject : Company

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138; Companies Act, 1956. - Sections 433(e), (f),434 (i) (a), 439(1)(b), 237, 450(2),; Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) - Section 195

Advocate for Appellant : Mr.H.Karthik Seshadri, Adv

Petition filed under Sections 433(e) & (f) r/w 434 (i) (a) and 439(1)(b) and 237 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking to wind up the Respondent Company namely M/s Subhiksha Trading Services Limited uner the provisions...

P.Selvamani ... Vs. the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation

Court : Chennai

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution Of India - Article 226

Advocate for Appellant : Mr.Karthik, Adv.

1. The petitioner joined as Record Clerk in the respondent Corporation on 12.12.1979. The post of Record Clerk comes under Miscellaneous Group under the rules framed by the Board of the respondent Corporation. On completion of...

K.Palani Vs The Secretary

Court : Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASRESERVED ON : 26.02.2026 DELIVERED ON : 13.03.2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR W.P. Nos. 29670/2015, 15623 of 2019, 15973 of 2018, 16924 of 2019, 14887 of 2019 and 1857...

Chandran Ratnaswami Vs. K.C. Palanisamy and ors

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL/CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.__4540________OF 201.[Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.13120 OF 2013]. CHANDRAN RATNASWAMI APPELLANT VERSUS K.C. PALANISAMY AND OTHERS RESPONDENTS WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. 736-737 __________OF 201.(Arising...

Shubhas Jain Vs. Rajeshwari Shivam

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : DILIP ANNASAHEB TAUR __

1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2848 OF2021(Arising out of SLP (C) No.1837 of 2021) SHUBHAS JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS RAJESHWARI SHIVAM & ORS. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT INDIRA BANERJEE, J.Leave granted.2....

M/s. Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Co.ltd. Vs. Rambha Devi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

Advocate for Appellant : ARCHANA PATHAK DAVE __

1 Reportable 2023INSC832 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/EXTRA-ORDINARY JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No 841 of 2018 M/s Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Co Ltd .... Appellant(s) Versus Rambha Devi & Ors ....Respondent(s) WITH SLP(C) No.10918/2018...

The State of Tamil Nadu, Vs B.Kotteeswari

Court : Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 11-02-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN in W.A.SR.No.17048 of 20261. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary, Labour and Employment...

Management of Madras Motors Ltd. Vs. Presideing Officer, Labour Court ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 226; Service Rules; FCI Staff Regulations - Regulation 75

Reported in : (2008)IIILLJ345Mad

Advocate for Appellant : Karthik, Adv. for; T.S. Gopalan and Co.

ORDERK. Chandru, J.1. Heard the arguments of Mr. Karthik, learned Counsel representing T.S. Gopalan & Co. and appearing for the Management and Mr. Balan Handass, learned Counsel appointed as Amicus Curiae for the unrepresented workmen and...

Chandran Ratnaswami and Others Vs. K.C. Palanisamy and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 409, 420, 405, 471, 389

M.Y. Eqbal, J.Leave granted.2. Since common questions of law are involved, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. However, for the sake of convenience, the factual matrix giving...

Vibhas Kumar Jha vs.delhi High Court Legal Service Committee

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:11. 01.2019 + W.P.(C) 839/2018 & CM No.8143/2018 VIBHAS KUMAR JHA versus DELHI HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICE COMMITTEE Advocates who appeared in this case:...