w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Behar Engineering Corporation v/s State of Bihar


Company & Directors' Information:- D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29269TZ1932PTC000046

Company & Directors' Information:- IN ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210DL2011PTC212284

Company & Directors' Information:- THE ENGINEERING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999KA1951PTC000699

    C.W.J.C. 2056 Of 2004

    Decided On, 19 August 2005

    At, High Court of Bihar

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.KATRIAR

    For the Appearing Parties: -------------



Judgment Text

S.K.KATRIAR, J.

(1.) Heard Mr. Samrendra Pratap Singh for petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, Learned JC to Standing Counsel No. I for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 (State of Bihar and its functionaries), Mr. Umakant Singh for respondent No. 5 (Managing Director, Bihar State Small Industries Corporation), Mr. Madan Mohan for respondent Nos. 6 to 9, and Mr. Chittaranjan Sinha for respondent No. 10 (M/s. Paras Febritek through its own Kanti Kumar). This writ petition is directed against the order bearing letter No. 1091-D, dated 16.10.2001 (Annexure-3), issued by the Patna Industrial Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the Authority'), whereby the lease-hold rights in favour of the petitioner with respect to the industrial plot in question situate in the township of Patna has been cancelled on account of violation of the terms and conditions of the lease deed. It is further directed against order bearing memo No. 34-D, dated 7.1.2003 (Annexure-F), whereby the said industrial plot has been allotted in favour of respondent No. 10.

(2.) According to the writ petition, respondent No. 5 (Bihar State Small Industries Corporation) had executed a lease deed on 1.6.1973 (Annexure-1), assigning lease-hold rights with respect to the industrial plot in question in favour of the petitioner for industrial purposes and on the terms and conditions detailed in the lease deed. Possession of the same was made over to the petitioner on 2.6.1973. The petitioner unit came in production on 1.12.1980 and went on upto 1990, whereafter it was closed in 1983 for circumstances beyond the petitioner's control. The State Government had in the meanwhile transferred ownership of the plot in question in favour of respondent No. 6 (Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority) for Administrative reasons. The Authority had issued show-cause notice dated 21.7.1988 (Annexure-A) to the petitioner to resume production failing which the lease deed shall be cancelled. It is further stated that the affairs in question are governed by the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority Act. The same was amended by the Bihar State Industrial Area Development Authority (Amendment) Act 1991, a photocopy of the gazette notification whereof is marked Annexure-A to the counter affidavit of respondent Nos. 2 to 4. The Authority ultimately came to the conclusion that the petitioner has although acted in violation of the terms and conditions of the lease by not setting up the industry for which the lease was granted leading to the impugned orders. The writ petition has, therefore, been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned orders and to restore the petitioner's possession. -

(3.) The respondents have placed on record their separate counter affidavits except respondent No. 5, wherein strenuous efforts have been made to justify the impugned action, and have opposed the writ petition.

(4.) I have perused the materials on record and considered the elaborate submissions of learned counsel for the parties. I must first of all consider the petitioner's submission that the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner vide the memorandum of appeal dated 22.10.2001 (Annexure-7) has remained pending although and may be directed to the disposed of. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the same (Annexure-7) is not really a memorandum of appeal, not having been filed in the prescribed proforma nor the prescribed stamps were affixed. The objection is stated only to be rejected. Counsel for the respondents have not been able to bring to my notice as to which provision of law prescribes the proforma and the provision for payment of Court-fee. Furthermore, it is an established procedure in judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings that a document initiating an adjudication is not dismissed at the inception for such defects. If such defects are noticed, then time is allowed to the petitioner to remove the same. No such order passed by the prescribed authority has been brought to my notice.

(5.) The next limb of this argument advanced on behalf of the respondents deserves serious consideration. It is stated in the counter affidavits that the memorandum of appeal dated 22.10.2001 (Annexure-7) has never been filed by the petitioner, and is a got-up document for the purposes of this case. Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4, and respondent No. 10, are right in their submission that the writ petition nowhere states that such an appeal has been preferred and is pending. Paragraph-17 of the writ petition states that soon after receipt of the impugned order dated 16.10.2001 (Annexure-3), the petitioner had approached respondent No. 6 (Managing Director, Patna Industrial Area Development Authority), and respondent No. 7 (the Development Officer, Patna Industrial Area Development Authority), and explained to them that cancellation of the lease was not in accordance with law, the terms and conditions of the lease-deed, and request was made to recall the same. It does state that the petitioner had filed representation (Annexure-7/A) before respondent No. 6 and respondent No. 7. The representation dated 22.10.2001 (Annexure-7/A) is not addressed to the prescribed appellate authority, and also does not refer to the alleged memorandum of appeal dated 22.10.2001 (Annexure-7). (5.1) Section 6 of the said Bihar Act 16 of 1974, inserted Sub-section (2) of Section 16 of the Act, and is set out hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference ;- (2-a) In case of necessary effective steps are not taken within the fixed period to establish the industry, the authority shall in such condition, cancel the allotment of allotted plot shed and also forfeit the amount deposited in this connection. The authority shall, before cancelling the allotment allow one month time to the allottee to put up his case. The allottee on being dissatisfied with the order of the authority may file an appeal to the State Government within one month and the State Government shall, after due consideration dispose it of within two months from the date of receipt of the appeal. It is thus manifest that allotment of the plot (shed) can be cancelled if its lessee has failed to establish the industry within the fixed period. It further appears that before cancelling the allotment, the allottee shall be allowed one month time to put up his case. It further provides for an appeal before the State Government within, one month from the date of order of cancellation. It is stated in the counter affidavit of the Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority, that head of the department concerned, namely, Industrial Development Commissioner, is the prescribed appellate authority, and has to receive and dispose of the appeal. It is stated in paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 that the petitioner has not preferred any appeal. (5.2) It thus appears to me on a consideration of the materials placed on record that the petitioner never preferred appeal in terms of the aforesaid provisions before the State Government and the alleged memorandum of appeal is apocryphal and a got-up document for the purposes of the case. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is not maintainable on two counts. The petitioner has bye-passed the statutory remedy available to him under the Act. Furthermore, the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands and has tried to mislead the Court by creating a document to take it down the garden path. He has thus disentitled himself from any relief. Learned counsel for respondent No. 10 has placed reliance on the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court reported in 2000 (2) PLJR 189 Parimal v. State of Bihar, the relevant portion of which is set out hereinbelow for the facility of quick 25. Therefore, in my view, it is not a case of mere violation of the terms of the agreement but the very display of the hoardings without the permission of the District Engineer of the District Board was wholly illegal and unauthorised. No document has been filed nor there was any averments before this Court that the prior permission of the District Engineer was obtained to erect the hoarding on the land of the District Board. Therefore, I am constrained to hold that the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands. Thus, such conduct on the part of the petitioner does not entitle him to any relief under the writ jurisdiction. This position is well settled that when an applicant approaches a Court for a discretionary and equitable relief he must approach the Court with clean hands and must display most clarity. There must not be any misrepresentation of vital facts in the writ petition. Reference in this regard can be usefully made to a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Kumar Kathuria v. State of Haryana and Ors. and yet other case of Welcome Hotel and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. Similar was the view taken by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Baidyanath Mahto and Ors. v. The Agricultural Produce Market Committee and Anr. 1996 (2) PLJR 345. I am also reminded of the judgment in the case of The King v. The General Commissioners for the Purposes of the Income Tax Acts for the district of Kensington 1917 Vol. 1 Law Reports King's Bench Division 486, wherein it has been held that a petitioner disentitles himself from consideration of the matter on merits if it is guilty of fraud, misrepresentation, or suppression of vital materials. It has been held as follows :- ...There having been a suppression of material facts by the applicant in her affidavit, the Court would refuse a writ of prohibition without going into the merits of the case.

(6.) Learned counsel for respondent No. 10 is further right in his submission that the writ petition is hit by delay, laches, negligence and acquiescence. Law is well settled that an aggrieved person must approach the writ Court before parallel rights are created and allowed to be entrenched by lapse of time and acquiescence. Running out of physical time is one of the factors. In the present case, the order was passed on 16.10.2001 (Annexure-3), whereby the petitioner's show cause was rejected and allotment of the industrial plot in question was cancelled. That provided the cause of action to the petitioner. The plot of land in question was allotted in favour of respondent No. 10 on 7.1.2003 (Annexure B/10 to the counter affidavit, of respondent No. 10). The petitioner was deprived of possession of the plot in question on 22.10.2003, and was made over to respondent No. 10 on the same date, vide order dated 22.10.2003 (Annexure D/10 to the same counter affidavit). The writ petition was indeed filed on 16.2.2004. Had the petitioner filed the writ petition soon after the said order dated 16.10.2001 (Annexure-3) was passed, allotment of the plot in favour of respondent No. 10 and dispossession may have has been taken place. I am, therefore, of the view that the petitioner approached this Court belatedly, much after the cause of action had arisen in favour of the petitioner, and this allowed parallel rights to be created in favour of respondent No. 10, which was entrenched by lapse of time, laches, negligence and acquiescence attributable to the petitioner.

(7.) It appears to me on a perusal of the materials on record that the petitioner never took the lease in question seriously and wanted to retain it, more as an immoveable property, rather than as a lease for the avowed objective mentioned in t

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

he lease deed violation of which can validly lead to cancellation of the same. The materials on record show that he put it to minor/inconsequential industrial use in 1980 i.e. seven years after commencement of the lease. Photo copies of the electricity bills placed on record by the petitioner illumine this position. The low consumption of electricity speaks volumes that no industry was being run there. The same can at best be the bills for a small house-hold. The respondents have placed on record various letters which are annexed to the counter affidavit, whereby show-cause notices were being issued to the petitioner over a protracted period saying that the respondent authorities had found that the plot in question was not being used for industrial purposes, was really lying idle, and ultimately led to the impugned order. The electric supply line was disconnected on 30.12.1995 and was never resumed. The petitioner seems to be unmindful of the position that the plot of land has been leased on a nominal payment, and with the avowed objective of industrial purposes detailed in the lease deed. I am, therefore, convinced that there are adequate materials on record to justify the impugned order. (8.) There is no merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

30-07-2020 Mahrishi Arvind Institute of Engineering, Rajasthan Versus Ranjit Singh & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-07-2020 M/s. Arudra Engineering Private Limited, Represented by its Managing Director, R. Natraj Versus M/s. Pathanjali Ayurved Limited, Represented by its Director, New Delhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-07-2020 Rajeev Gandhi Memorial College of Engineering & Technology & Another Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh & Others Supreme Court of India
06-07-2020 K. Prem Chander & Another Versus M/s. Hella India Automotive Private Limited Formerly known as FTZ Engineering (P) Ltd., Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
23-06-2020 Rohini Gogoi (Under Suspension) Versus State of Assam Rep. by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Public Health Engineering Deptt. High Court of Gauhati
09-06-2020 Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. Versus Principal, College of Engineering, Pune High Court of Judicature at Bombay
22-05-2020 Patel Engineering Ltd. Versus North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd. (Neepco) Supreme Court of India
11-05-2020 Posco Engineering & Construction India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Sinew Developers Pvt. Ltd. Supreme Court of India
11-05-2020 South East Asia Marine Engineering & Constructions Ltd. (Seamec Ltd.) Versus Oil India Limited Supreme Court of India
18-03-2020 M/s. COPCO Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director K. George Versus Southern Railway, Office of the Chief Administrative Officer (Construction), Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-03-2020 Abhighyan Bhattacharya & Another Versus School Of Engineering & Technology & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-03-2020 M/s. Rite Choice Foundations and Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Rep., by its Managing Director, C.K. Sridhar Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by its Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-03-2020 Indian Oil Corporation Limited. Versus TOYO Engineering Corporation & Another High Court of Delhi
05-03-2020 Dr.(Mrs) Sania Akhtar, Working as Principal Director (Senior Principal Scientist), Central Institute of Plastics Engineering & Technology SARP, Bangalore Versus The Director General, Central Institute of Plastics Engineering & Technology, Ministry of Chemical & Fertilizers, Guindy, Chennai & Another Central Administrative Tribunal Bangalore Bench
02-03-2020 M/s. Project Engineering Corporation Limited, Ernakulam, Represented by Manager (Administrations) Binu Jacob Versus M/s. Doshion Private Ltd., Ahmedabad, Represented by Its Director, Rakshit Doshi High Court of Kerala
19-02-2020 M.I.E.T. Engineering College, Rep. by its Chairman, Er.A. Mohamed Yunus, Trichy & Others Versus The Registrar, Anna University of Technology, Guindy & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-02-2020 Nileshbhai Arvindbhai Gandhi, Director, Cube Construction Engineering Limited Versus State of Gujarat & Another High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
10-02-2020 M/s. JV Engineering Associate, Civil Engineering Contractors, Represented by its Partner, S. Jaikumar Versus General Manager, CORE, Allahabad, Represented by Deputy Chief Engineer, Railway Electrification, Chennai, Egmore High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-02-2020 V. Vennila Versus The Executive Engineering Transmission Line Construction/ Tamilnadu Transmission Corporation Ltd. (TANTRANSCO), Thanjavur District & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-02-2020 M/s. Shintec Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., represented by its Authorised Signatory, Vanagaram Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST) JJ Nagar Assessment Circle, Thirumangalam, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-02-2020 Tarun Keshrichand Shah & Another Versus M/s. Kishore Engineering Company & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
03-02-2020 The Government of Tamil Nadu, Highways Department, rep. by the Divisional Engineer (H) Chennai Metropolitan Development Plan Division-1 Versus M/s. Jenefa Constructions, Civil Engineering Contractor, rep. by its Partner, M. Arunachalam High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-01-2020 United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Bhilai Engineering Corporation Ltd. Chhatisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Raipur
21-01-2020 Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Nandanam, Chennai & Others Versus M/s. UB Engineering Limited, Rep. by its Power of Attorney G.D. Deshpande & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-01-2020 Tractebel Engineering Private Limited Versus Patnazi Power Limited National Company Law Tribunal New Delhi
21-01-2020 The Indian Officer's Association, Chennai Versus M/s. Swaruba Engineering Construction Company Private Limited, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-01-2020 Meerut Development Authority Meerut Versus M/s Civil Engineering Construction Corporation & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
20-01-2020 State of AP Versus Devi Engineering & Construction High Court of Andhra Pradesh
13-01-2020 M/s. Jullundur Engineering Complany, Jalandhar V/S Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar & Another High Court of Punjab and Haryana
09-01-2020 Ajay Kumar Bishnoi, Former Managing Director, M/s. Tecpro Systems Ltd. Versus M/s. Tap Engineering, Rep. by Jawahar High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-01-2020 M/s. Sathee Engineering Construction Company, Rep. by its Proprietor, Gopu Kumar, Kollam Versus Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-01-2020 Caparo Engineering India Limited V/S Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Customs and Excise, Ujjain Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
03-01-2020 Harji Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. Versus Hindustan Steelworks Construction Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
02-01-2020 C. Narayanasamy (Deceased) & Others Versus The Executive Engineer, Agriculture Engineering Department, Tiruvannamalai High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-01-2020 Raj Engineering Works and Others. V/S Indian Overseas Bank DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM
20-12-2019 Infant Jesus College of Engineering, Rep. by its Chair Person, A. Roselet Bai Versus The Registrar, Anna University, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-12-2019 Standard Chartered Bank Versus Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited & Another Supreme Court of India
18-12-2019 M/s. Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., Represented by its Authorized Representative, New Delhi Versus V.O.Chidambaram Port Trust High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-12-2019 Basava Engineering School of Technology Rep. by its Principal B.J. Patil Versus State of Karnataka Rep. by its Prl. Secretary Department of Technical Education High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench OF Kalaburagi
25-11-2019 National Highways Authority of India Versus Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. High Court of Delhi
20-11-2019 M/s. Coverntry Springs and Engineering Company Limited & Others Versus M/s. Assets Reconstruction Company of India Limited (ARCIL) & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
15-11-2019 The Manager, Vimal Jyothi Engineering College, Kannur & Others Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Government Secretariat, Trivandrum & Others High Court of Kerala
15-11-2019 M/s. Laxmi Civil Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Kerla Water Authority High Court of Kerala
13-11-2019 The Director, E.S.I. Corporation, Sub Regional Office, Kochi Versus M/s. Western Marine Engineering, Kochi, Represented by Its Managing Partner, K.T. Jacob High Court of Kerala
29-10-2019 Vinod Kumar Jain Versus U.T. Administration, through Secretary Engineering, Chandigarh & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
25-10-2019 Hindustan Engineering Training Centre, Rep. By its President 40, Chennai Versus The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax –III 121, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-10-2019 S. Ravi & Others Versus Dev Anand Vijayan, Executive Director, The Management of Sri Karthikeya Spinning & Weaving Mills Pvt. Ltd., Formerly known as Perur Engineering Products, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-10-2019 M/s. Steer Engineering Private Limited, Represented herein by its authorized Signatory, Satish Padmanabhan Versus M/s. Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare Holdings (US)LLC & Others High Court of Karnataka
17-10-2019 M/s. Teems Engineering Construction, Rep. by its Partner, G.R. Ravi, Chennai Versus The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, General Construction Circle, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
16-10-2019 Vivek Verma Versus Ipro Sugar Engineering Pvt. Ltd. & Another National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
30-09-2019 M/s. Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., Rep. by its Authorized Signatory A. Vinolin Versus M/s. Shri Ramana Geavy Engineering P. Ltd., Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-09-2019 Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Versus FEPL Engineering (P) Ltd. & Another High Court of Delhi
23-09-2019 National Highways And Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi & Others Versus M/s T.K. Engineering Consortium Pvt. Ltd., Assam & Others High Court of Gauhati
13-09-2019 Pragatisheel Engineering Shramik Sangh Industrial Estate, Chhattisgarh Versus Simplex Castings Ltd, Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-09-2019 K. Dhanasekar Engineering Contractor Versus The Union of India, rep.by its General Manager Southern Railway, Park Town, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-09-2019 Ethos Ltd. Versus Vijay H.A. Proprietor Interscap Engineering National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
09-09-2019 Manjeera Engineering & Construction Company Private Limited Versus Union of India High Court of for the State of Telangana
09-09-2019 Ashish Manik Versus Sr Marine & Offshore Engineering Pvt. Ltd. & Another National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
05-09-2019 M/s. Velar Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd., Rep by its Managing Director A.C. Vadhivelu Versus The Authorized Officer/Chief Manager, Indian Bank, Kanchipuram & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-09-2019 IL&FS Engineering & Construction Company Ltd., Formerly Maytas Infra Ltd., Represented by Prabhakar Reddy Versus Government of Karnataka, by its Secretary, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
28-08-2019 Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Versus A Consortium of Sime Darby Engineering Sdn. Bhd. & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
19-08-2019 Dr. Bareet Chand Versus IMS Engineering College & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
31-07-2019 M.J.R. College of Engineering & Technology, Rep., by its Principal, G.V. Ramu & Another Versus State of Andhra Pradesh and Corporation Bank, Damalacheruvu Rep., by its Branch Manager, Sudhir Kumar Dubey High Court of Andhra Pradesh
25-07-2019 M/s. Emkay Engineering Works, Represented by its Proprietor, R. Chinniah, Chennai Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, Pattaravakkam Assessment Circle, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-07-2019 Corsan Corviam Construccion S.A.-Sadhbhav Engineering Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Trade & Taxes High Court of Delhi
18-07-2019 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Represented by the Chief General Manger, Telecom (Tamilnadu Circle), Chennai & Others Versus M/s. Sakthi Engineering Constructions, Erode & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-07-2019 M/s. Aditya Auto Products & Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Head-HR Ramesh Pai Versus M/s. Aditya Auto Products (NTTF), Rep. by its Secretary & Others High Court of Karnataka
12-07-2019 Bhajarang Engineering College, Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Trustee, M.G. Baskaran Versus All India Council for Technical Education, Rep. by its Advisor - I (Approval), New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-07-2019 Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. & Others Versus Rajinder Kumar & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
08-07-2019 A. Chinnadurai, Handloom Contractor, Government College of Engineering 1st Gate, Salem Versus M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., rep. by its General Manager, Indian Oil Bhavan, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-07-2019 M/s. Perfect Engineering Associates Pvt. Ltd., Chennai Versus The Joint Commissioner (CT), Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-07-2019 IL & FS Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. Versus Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Others High Court of Jharkhand
27-06-2019 M/s. Shree Venkateshwara Educational & Charitable Trust, Represented by its Chairman, P. Venkatachalam, Administering Shree Venkateshwara Hi-Tech Engineering College, Erode Versus The Registrar, Anna University, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-06-2019 Excel Engineering College, Rep. by its Director, Namakkal District Versus The Anna University, Rep. by its Registrar, Guindy, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-06-2019 Sri Nandhanam College of Engineering and Technology, Molagarampatti, Tiruppattur, Rep. by its Chairman, P.M.N. Mohan Krishnaa Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Principal Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-06-2019 Indirani Versus The Superintending Engineering, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Salem Electricity Distribution Circle & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-06-2019 M. Kumarasamy Health & Educational Trust, Administering M. Kumarasamy College of Engineering, Rep. by its Managing Trustee, Dr. K. Ramakrishnan Versus The Registrar, Anna University, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-06-2019 The Director, Rajagiri School of Engineering & Technology, Kochi & Others Versus A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technological University, Represented by Its Registrar, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
22-05-2019 Union of India Versus M/s. Sikka Engineering Co. High Court of Delhi
17-05-2019 The Executive Engineer Public Health Engineering Department, Karimganj Versus M/S Gopinath Udyog P Ltd. Karimganj & Others High Court of Gauhati
08-05-2019 Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited Versus Standard Chartered Bank & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
30-04-2019 Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Rep. by its Sivakumar, Accountant, Madurai Versus Joint Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
25-04-2019 Diffusion Engineering Limited Versus Prithviraj Patle In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
24-04-2019 Arihant Engineering Industries and Others V/S Leo Ispat Ltd. and Others. High Court of Delhi
18-04-2019 M/s. Megha Engineering & Infrastructures Ltd., Rep.by T. Ashok Reddy, Associated Vice-President (Legal) Versus The Commissioner of Central Tax & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
16-04-2019 M/s. Southern Cogen Systems Private Limited, Vellachery, Rep. by its Director B.S. Adisesh Versus M/s. Sree Venkateswara Engineering Corporation, Coimbatore, Rep. by its Managing Director, C.N. Sathyamurthy & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
15-04-2019 Galvanotek Industries Private Ltd. Versus Coventry Spring & Engineering Company Ltd. & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
12-04-2019 Andrews Mathew Versus Madura Coats Ltd., Ambasamudram Taluk, Through it's Manager, (Engineering Services), S. Balakrishnan Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
10-04-2019 The Executive Engineering IITMPD-II, CPWD, IITM Project Circle, IITM Campus, Chennai Versus M/s. IVRCL Ltd., Andhra Pradesh & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-04-2019 Garware Wall Ropes Ltd Versus Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd. Supreme Court of India
10-04-2019 M/s. Rabi Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. Versus CGST & Excise, Kolkata North Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal East Regional Bench Kolkata
05-04-2019 The Managing Director, Hi tech Engineering and Eco Solution (P) Ltd., Edayar, Paravoor, Ernakulam Versus Mathew Philip, Vettikkad Estate, Kaliasanad & Another Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
03-04-2019 M/S. Zentech Off-Shore Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Appellant Versus Commissioner of GST & CE, Chennai South Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
02-04-2019 L.S. Raja Versus Engineering in Chief & Chief Engineer (General) & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-03-2019 Noorul Islam College of Engineering & Others Versus Gopikrishnan Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
27-03-2019 UK Insurance Ltd. Versus R & S Pilling t/a Phoenix Engineering United Kingdom Supreme Court
27-03-2019 Ballarpur Industries Limited, through M.S. Pradeep, DGM Law, Gurgaon Versus Karapara Project Engineering, by its POA Hariharan Potti, Surat & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-03-2019 Savik Vijai Engineering Private Limited, Jayanagar, Bangalore & Others Versus BCL Financial Services Private Limited, Bangalore High Court of Karnataka
19-03-2019 D. Thulaseedharan Nair Versus Mohandas College of Engineering & Technology, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
12-03-2019 Pinnacle Institute of Engineering & Management(PIEM) Versus Pinak Pani Ghosh & Another West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata