Monthly Archive: September 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. NO. OF 2025 Kalaignar TV Private Limited Represented by its Authorised Signatory Mr. G. Rajendran – Age 66 Years No. 367/369, Anna Salai Teynampet Chennai – 600 018 …Petitioner Vs. 1. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – 18

[11/09, 08:05] Sekarreporter: THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. NO. OF 2025 Kalaignar TV Private Limited Represented by its Authorised Signatory Mr. G. Rajendran – Age 66 Years No....

JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI C.R.P. (PD) No.2677 of 2025 and C.M.P. No.15116 of 2025 Roja … Petitioner I hold that revision under Article 227, is maintainable before this Court. For the foregoing reasons, the order of the trial Court suffers from infirmity, requiring interference by this Court and the Civil Revision Petition is allowed

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON : 21.08.2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 04.09.2025 CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI C.R.P. (PD) No.2677 of 2025 and C.M.P. No.15116 of 2025 Roja …...

In view of what has been held above, we find that the appellant is not guilty of the offence under Section 306. We acquit her of the charge under Section 306. The net result is that, the appeal stands allowed and impugned judgment of the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, Kalaburagi dated 27.04.2018 in Criminal Appeal No.3658 of 2011 is set aside. The appellant is on bail. Her bail bonds stand discharged. …………………………….J. [B.V. NAGARATHNA] …………………………….J. [K. V. VISWANATHAN] New Delhi; 9th September, 2025

2025 INSC 1089 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1044 OF 2018 GEETA …APPELLANT (S) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA …RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N...

22.As the registration has been done properly as per the Statute, Section 26-E of SARFAESI Act will come into play. The secured creditor, viz., the petitioner Bank, shall be paid in priority over all other debts. In such view of the matter, the impugned communications sent by the Investigating Agency under BUDS Act, have no force and are liable to be quashed. 23.Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned communications of the 3rd respondent are quashed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 02.09.2025 mkn Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No To 1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Home, Excise and Prohibition, Fort St. George, Chennai. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Nagapattinam District, Nagapattinam. 3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Nagapattinam. 4.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Nagapattinam. 5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. N. SATHISH KUMAR, J. mkn W.P.No.20431 of 2024 02.09.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 02.09.2025 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR W. P.No.20431 of 2024and W.M.P.Nos.22374 & 22377 of 2024 City Union Bank Limited, Represented...

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com