You may also like...
-
The Madras High Court, by a Bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, upheld the Appellate Tribunal’s condonation of a delay of 763 days in filing an appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority, holding that such discretionary orders are not to be interfered with unless perverse or arbitrary. The case involved alleged benami transactions with V.K. Sasikala as beneficial owner and V.S.J. Dinakaran as benamidar in relation to the Spectrum Mall transaction in demonetised notes . The Court agreed with the Department’s submission that a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach must prevail and that procedural delay should not defeat substantial justice, particularly in matters involving public interest, The appellant was represented by Senior Counsel Vijay Narayan for Adv Pranav Charan, and the DCIT (BPU) was represented by Senior Standing Counsel Mrs.M. Sheela and Junior Standing Counsel H. Siddarth.
by Sekar Reporter · Published April 2, 2026
-
-
O.A.No.651 of 2022 in C.S (Comm.Div.) No.205 of 2022 M.SUNDAR.J In this order, the parties to the captioned application shall be referred to by their respective ranks in the main suit for the sake of convenience and clarity. [10/26, 14:39] Sekarreporter 1: The Madras High Court temporarily restrained digital payment app MobilePe and its group companies from offering Unified Payments Interface (UPI) and Bharat Interface for Money (BHIM) services following a trademark infringement suit filed by PhonePe. In an interim order passed on October 19, Justice M Sundar held that the logos of the two apps were similar, and that a prima facie case of “possible deception” had been made out. [10/26, 14:39] Sekarreporter 1: ..
by Sekar Reporter · Published October 26, 2022