Vinothpandian: 2019 (2) CTC 1 : subramanian R vs ICICI bank ltd chennai : Bankers book evidence act 1884 section 4 : Held when bank marked statement of accounts along with certificate under section 4 of bankers books evidence act , certificate need not be produced for each and every page of statement of accounts

[8/18, 09:43] Vinothpandian: 2019 (2) CTC 1 : subramanian R vs ICICI bank ltd chennai : Bankers book evidence act 1884 section 4 : Held when bank marked statement of accounts along with certificate under section 4 of bankers books evidence act , certificate need not be produced for each and every page of statement of accountsæ
[8/18, 09:53] Vinothpandian: 2012(6) CTC 841 : mahender gayal vs kadamba international : section 201 CRPC 1973 applicable only during pre – cognizable stage and not applicable during post – cognizance
[8/18, 09:53] Vinothpandian: 2019 (6) CTC 263 : kaleur rahman vs P kannan : suit for bare injunction restraining the authorities from granting electricity connection falls within bar of section 145 of the electricity act 2003
[8/18, 10:01] Vinothpandian: 2016 (2) CTC 761 : Manjula L vs state of tamil nadu : government servant convicted for offence under section 138 of NI act , employee filed appeal and settled dispute and appellate court compounded offences , cannot be regarded as offence involving moral turpitude , dismissal of employee from service liable to be set aside
[8/19, 10:40] Vinothpandian: 2004 (2) SCC 783 : karnataka Rare earth vs dept of mines : person acting without any lawful authority must not find himself placed in a position more advantageous than a person acting with lawful authority
[8/19, 10:40] Vinothpandian: 1987 (1) SCC 551 : union of india vs wing commander RR Hingorani : Person doing something with full knowledge of its adverse consequences must face the consequences and cannot claim equitable relief
[8/19, 10:40] Vinothpandian: AIR 1993 SC 852 : Ramjas foundation vs union of india : Person invoking an equitable extraordinary jurisdiction under art 226 of constitution of india should come with clean hands and should not conceal the material fact
[8/19, 10:40] Vinothpandian: 1996 (5) SCC 54 : shangrila food products ltd vs LIC : person seeking equity must bow to equity
[8/21, 05:59] Vinothpandian: 1995 (1) RCR 613 ( DB ) : Niyamavedi vs Raman srivastava : Regarding persons alleged with offences affecting security of state , any citizen can bring to the notice of court that investigation is not proceeding in a proper manner
[8/21, 05:59] Vinothpandian: 1983 CRI LJ 722 : Gurcharan singh vs state of punjab : If an indivdual is able to urge a point , the decision of which will end the abuse of justice or can win freedom to a person illegally detained or threatened to be detained in such a manner the court is not to be influenced by the technicality of the objection as to locus standi to deny relief or refuse to go into the matter , the action of the court has to be conductive to the administration of justice
[8/22, 15:37] Vinothpandian: 2014 (3) CCC 18 SC : Alok jena vs union of India : Regarding transfer of investigation from state police to CBI , court should exercise the powers sparingly and with utmost care
[8/22, 15:37] Vinothpandian: 2017 (4) CCC 485 SC : Lekh Raj ( dead ) through LR s and others : while executing decree of a civil court , executing court cannot go beyond the decree
[8/22, 15:37] Vinothpandian: 2017 (3) CCC 115 : SDU travels pvt ltd vs vipin sharma : In a proccedings in an appropriate forum , granting final relief in interim order not permissible
[8/22, 15:45] Vinothpandian: 2013 (7 ) SCC 685 : commissioner of police new delhi & another vs mehar singh : Dismissal of SLP by supreme court in limine does not mean approval of the impugned judgement
[8/22, 15:45] Vinothpandian: 2017 (4) SCC 170 : JSW infrastructure ltd and another vs kakinada seaports ltd and others : superior courts must act with restraint in contractual matters
[8/23, 05:19] Vinothpandian: 2019 (1) MLJ 163 : QD seatamon designs pvt ltd nungambakkam chennai vs P suresh : statement of law made by supreme court is declaration of law within meaning of art 141 of the constitution of india ,statement of law contained in precedent to be followed as matter of judicial discipline
[8/23, 05:19] Vinothpandian: 2019(6) CTC 337 : Fazalullah khan vs M Akbar : Interim orders granted by supreme court not automatically vacated beyond six months period , such interim order must continue to be in force till appeal decided

You may also like...