You may also like...
-
Madurai. A division bench of Justices N Kirubakaran and B Pugalendhi observed that the court’s valuable time is spent on cases pertaining to encroachments at both high court’s Madurai bench and the principal seat. Since the menace is increasing, the courts are unable to spend time on other cases which require its attention. Though there has been no improvement with regard to removal of encroachments in the state, the officials could not be blamed as the encroachers are often powerful and there is no security to the lives of officials. The judges said that though it was stated that most of the encroachers are people below the poverty line, the court cannot show any misplaced sympathy to the encroachers as it would create a bad precedent.
by Sekar Reporter · Published December 27, 2020
-
Justice Anitha Sumanth held that the dealer be afforded reasonable opportunity of being heard prior to framing of an assessment. Such reasonable opportunity, Courts have consistently held, must include an opportunity of personal hearing. Admittedly, in the present case, the petitioner has not been heard personally prior to the impugned orders having been passed.
by Sekar Reporter · Published April 17, 2021
-
JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH W.P.No.22117 of 2014 20. For all the foregoing reasons, the impugned Order-in-Original No.25792/14 dated 20.05.2014 is set aside and the respondent shall refund the claim made by the petitioner, which is the subject matter of the Order-in- Original, together with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the refund application. The respondent shall endeavour to disburse the refund
by Sekar Reporter · Published September 5, 2020