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



MERBANC FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, PANJAGUTTA VERSUS CHILIPI KRISH GARMENTS (P) LTD.


Company & Directors' Information:- D R GARMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101GJ2005PTC046010

Company & Directors' Information:- R. R. GARMENTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51900MH1995PLC095544

Company & Directors' Information:- MERBANC FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED [Under Liquidation] CIN = L67120TG1992PLC014922

Company & Directors' Information:- S G GARMENTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101WB2004PLC098193

Company & Directors' Information:- K K P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65921TZ1994PTC005334

Company & Directors' Information:- B K GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2001PTC109850

Company & Directors' Information:- N K GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2000PTC107093

Company & Directors' Information:- K. D. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109WB2005PTC101896

Company & Directors' Information:- G AND A GARMENTS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101PB1995PTC016121

Company & Directors' Information:- V H GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52322MH2008PTC181066

Company & Directors' Information:- S. S. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL1996PTC083315

Company & Directors' Information:- KRISH FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U67190TN1995PTC031962

Company & Directors' Information:- G. M. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109DL2006PTC152683

Company & Directors' Information:- D AND D GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1975PTC007923

Company & Directors' Information:- J S GARMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900WB2009PTC135262

Company & Directors' Information:- K. B . GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109WB2011PTC166954

Company & Directors' Information:- KRISH SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140BR2014PTC022899

Company & Directors' Information:- A K GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17120DL2015PTC282847

Company & Directors' Information:- D P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL2004PTC129479

Company & Directors' Information:- V S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC143084

Company & Directors' Information:- P AND P GARMENTS PVT LTD [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC143556

Company & Directors' Information:- V S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101HR2005PTC068124

Company & Directors' Information:- L. H. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17121KA2011PTC060761

Company & Directors' Information:- K R GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17111WB1998PTC087046

Company & Directors' Information:- T & A GARMENTS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U52321TN1993PTC025318

Company & Directors' Information:- P. S. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18204DL2007PTC164238

Company & Directors' Information:- S. A. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17121DL2007PTC165007

Company & Directors' Information:- T S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51494DL1996PTC076668

Company & Directors' Information:- GARMENTS INDIA PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51909GJ1979PTC003310

Company & Directors' Information:- M. P. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17291DL2007PTC164129

Company & Directors' Information:- K. S. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2007PTC164404

Company & Directors' Information:- B G GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL2005PTC142488

Company & Directors' Information:- S P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL2003PTC120709

Company & Directors' Information:- P N GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311DL2004PTC127524

Company & Directors' Information:- V P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18109DL2012PTC233293

Company & Directors' Information:- S T GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109DL2015PTC277043

Company & Directors' Information:- P L GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17120DL2013PTC248417

Company & Directors' Information:- M. K. GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17291DL2007PTC164395

Company & Directors' Information:- R A GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP and Dissolved] CIN = U18101DL2003PTC123385

Company & Directors' Information:- C S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC134787

Company & Directors' Information:- B L GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC136912

Company & Directors' Information:- B D S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC137898

Company & Directors' Information:- T G GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL2005PTC143392

Company & Directors' Information:- G P S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U18101DL2006PTC149330

Company & Directors' Information:- G P GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2007PTC161067

Company & Directors' Information:- I B GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL2013PTC257044

Company & Directors' Information:- G P S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED. [Active] CIN = U74110DL2006PTC149330

Company & Directors' Information:- A G GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51300DL2013PTC257609

Company & Directors' Information:- V R V GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311DL2008PTC182256

Company & Directors' Information:- M V GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899HR2005PTC141797

Company & Directors' Information:- A AND R GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U17120HR2013PTC049037

Company & Directors' Information:- V K GARMENTS PRIVATE LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL1981PTC012410

Company & Directors' Information:- A S GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17212CH1992PTC012350

Company & Directors' Information:- V R GARMENTS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101CH1991PTC011345

Company & Directors' Information:- S B GARMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311DL2005PTC141954

    Criminal Appeal 372 Of 1999

    Decided On, 09 November 2004

    At, High Court of Andhra Pradesh

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA

    For the Appearing Parties: A.Rajendra Babu, B.Vishwanatha Reddy, V.T.M.Prasad, Advocates.



Judgment Text

P. S. NARAYANA, J.


( 1 ) THIS Criminal Appeal is filed as against the order of an acquittal recorded in c. C. No. 820 of 1997 on the file of the xv Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad as against A-4. The complaint as against A-5 was dismissed as not pressed on 20-2-1998. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that as against the conviction, A-1 to A-3 preferred Criminal Appeal No. 347 of 1998 on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, hyderabad and the same is pending disposal.


( 2 ) SRI Viswanadha Reddy, learned counsel representing the appellant-complainant would submit that there is a specific averment in the complaint as against A-4. Apart from this aspect of the matter, P. W. 1 specifically deposed that A-2 to A-5 approached the complainant on behalf of A-1 company, who have been looking after the day-to-day affairs of A-1 company and they entered into an agreement for the purpose of bill discounting facility for an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs and in view of the specific stand taken by the appellant-complainant, recording of acquittal as against A-4 cannot be sustained.


( 3 ) PER contra, Sri A. Rajendra Babu, learned counsel representing A-4/r-4 would contend that even as per the evidence available on record in general, and also exs. P-2, P-10 and P-22 in particular, A-4 cannot be fastened with criminal liability. The learned counsel also would submit that the evidence of P. W. 1 that A-2 to A-5 approached the complainant on behalf of A-1 company and they have been looking after the day-today affairs of A-1 company by itself may not be sufficient. The learned counsel also would submit that A-4 had not signed the cheques and to fasten the criminal liability as against such Director, clear and specific allegations in the complaint relating to the role played by him and also evidence thereto may be necessary. In the absence of the same, the acquittal recorded by the learned Magistrate cannot be disturbed.


( 4 ) THE learned counsel placed strong reliance on Neeta Bhalla v. S. M. S. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Hyderabad and another and Mukesh Gupta v. Kabsons Gas equipment Limited, Hyderabad and another in this regard.


( 5 ) HEARD both counsel.


( 6 ) THE averments made in the complaint filed by M/s. Merbanc Financial Services ltd. , appellant-complainant herein are as hereunder: the complainant is a limited company incorporated under the Companies Act and has been doing business in Hire Purchase, lease, Bill Discounting and ICD etc. The accused approached the complainant company for providing Bill Discounting facility upto a limit of Rs. 5 lakhs. The complainant accepted for the said request. Accordingly, on 18-11-1996 the accused entered into an agreement with the complainant company. Thereafter, the accused submitted the bills and the complainant discounted the bill and paid the amount after deducting its commission. The due date for the bill discount was on 26-4-1997. It is further contended that the accused issued a cheque dated 26-4-1997 for Rs. 5 lakhs drawn on Union bank of India, Somajiguda, Hyderabad to discharge the bill discount facility. The said cheque was signed and issued by the accused nos. 2 and 3 being the Managing Director and Joint Director of accused No. 1, being they are looking after the day-to-day affairs of the accused No. 1 company for and on behalf of accused No. 1, with the knowledge, consent and connivance of the accused nos. 4 and 5. The complainant presented the cheque for clearance with its banker. The said cheque was returned by the accused-bank on 9-9-1997 as dishonoured with an endorsement "funds insufficient" and the same was informed to the complainant by its bankers. After receiving the said information the complainant got issued a legal notice on 19-9-1997 demanding the accused to pay the cheque equivalent amount within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice. The said legal notice was duly served on all the accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 5. Accused No. 4 refused to receive the same. But, the accused neither gave any reply nor paid the amount. It is further contended that the accused issued cheque with dishonest intention to have a wrongful gain for themselves and to cause wrongful loss to the complainant without having sufficient funds in the account and not arranged for the payment of the cheque. Hence, in view of the same, A-1 to A-5 are punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience ).


( 7 ) AS already referred to supra, complaint against A-5 was dismissed as not pressed on 20-2-1998. A-1 to A-3 preferred Criminal appeal No. 347 of 1998 on the file of the metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad as against the conviction and the same is pending disposal. Aggrieved by the acquittal recorded as against A-4, the present criminal appeal is filed.


( 8 ) THE evidence of P. Ws. 1 and 2 was recorded, Exs. P-1 to P-22 and Exs. D-1 to d-5 were marked. P. W. 1 deposed in his chief-examination that on 8-8-1997 Board of directors passed a resolution to represent the company. A-2 to A-5 approached the complainant on behalf of A-1 company who are looking after the day-to-day affairs of a-1 company. P. W. 1 also deposed that on 18-11-1996 they entered into an agreement for the purpose of bill discounting facility for an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs. After deducting the interest and commission, the accused have to pay the loan within a period of 60 days. But the accused did not arrange the payments within the due date period. They presented the post-dated cheque and when sent for collection, the same was returned unpaid on 9-9-1997. Subsequently, they issued notice to all the Directors. The cheque was drawn by the Managing Director and Joint Director. The cheque was returned for the reason "insufficient funds". Even after receiving legal notice, the accused neither paid any amount nor gave any reply. Ex. P-1 is the Board resolution dated 8-8-1997, Ex. P-2 is the bill of exchange dated 28-2-1997, Exs. P-3 to p-9 are invoices, Ex. P-10 is the cheque dated 26-4-1997, Ex. P-11 is the cheque return memo dated 9-9-1997, Ex. P-12 is debit advice dated 10-9-1997 Ex. P-13 is the office copy of legal notice dated 19-9-1997, ex. P-14 is the receipt of Under Certificate of posting dated 19-9-1997, Exs. P-15 to P-18 are postal acknowledgment cards of accused no. 1 to 3 and A-5, Ex. P-19 is the unserved cover of A-4, Ex. P-20 is the statement of account, Ex. P-21 is the true extract of Xerox copy of certificate of incorporation dated 25-6-1996, Ex. P-22 is the original bill discounting agreement dated 18-11-1996.


( 9 ) P. W. 1 deposed about all the details and P. W. 1 also denied that the cheque is not a security and it is part of bill of exchange. P. W. 2 deposed that the present case was filed for Ex. P-2 invoice No. 008. Ex. D-1 letter pertains to previous bill. Accused paid the amount for Ex. D-1 bill. In Ex. D-4accused mentioned the amounts pertaining to ex. D-1 bill. Ex. D-3 is the cover under ex. D-4 amount. They have shown in the statement of account, which is Ex. P-20. In respect of invoice Nos. 14 to 16 they have received Ex. D-2. As per the statement, accused had not paid the amount to them. They have not accepted the letter dated 31 -3-1997. They have immediately informed orally (by telephonic call) to the accused for the same. Ex. P-10 cheque dated 26-4-1997 was issued for discharge of the present case bill. They have not received any amount for this transaction. P. Ws. 2 to 4 deposed in cross-examination that he had not participated in the entire negotiations till the disbursement of the loan. P. W. 1 looked after the accounts in their company and P. W. 2 is not aware whether the receipts given to the accused pertains to the first transaction. He has not given any reply to Ex. D-2 letter. P. W. 2 also admitted that they received letter dated 31-3-1997 marked as Ex. D-5. They have not given any reply to Ex. D-5 letter. P. W. 2 also deposed that he is not aware with whom P. W. 1 talked in telephone in regard to ex. D-5 letter. They have received Ex. P-10 cheque on the date of disbursement of second loan dated 1-3-197. Forthe entire transaction they have been dealing with accused Nos. 2 and 3. P. W. 2 denied the suggestion that undated cheque was filled by him and filed this false case in order to harass and pressurize the accused. Even as per the admission of the accused in 313 Cr. P. C. examination what was presented was only undated cheque but not a blank cheque. As far as acquittal of A-4 is concerned, the averments in the complaint and also the evidence of P. W. 1 to the effect that A-4 and a-5 also accompanied the other accused, there is no other material available on record.


( 10 ) IN Neeta Bhalla v. S. M. S. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Hyderabad and another (1st cited), while dealing with? prosecution of Directors of the company, which issued the cheque for its dishonour. Clear recitals should be there in the complaint indicating the role played by each of the accused- directors-Solitory sentence in the complaint that A-2 to A-4 are actively in management of the company" is absolutely vague and indefinite and hence complaint against the petitioner is liable to be quashed as no specific role is attributed to her in the issue of the cheque. "in fact, the learned Judge observed that, ?in order to fasten vicarious liability against a Director of the Company there must be clear, specific and unambiguous allegations made in the complaint. It is not as if every Director of the accused-company can be roped in automatically and be proceeded with for the offence committed by the company under Section 138 of the Act. The complainant can proceed against only such persons who at the time the offence was committed by the company were in-charge of and were responsible to the company for the conduct of its business. Such persons could be directors, managers, secretary or the other officers of the company. Such persons in-charge must mean that they were in over all control of the day-to-day business of the company or firm as the case may be. A complaint based on wild imaginations is not a complaint at all in the eye of law. The accusation against each of the director/person/ accused must be specified and unambiguous. The role played by each of the accused must be clearly stated in the complaint. The complaint if read as a whole must clearly disclose the role played by each of the Directors of the company in case of an offence committed by the company under section 138 of the Act. Any inartistic expression used in drafting the complaint cannot by itself be a ground for quashing the proceedings; but, at the same time, no complainant can be permitted to launch prosecution against all the Directors of the Company without there being a proper foundation in the complaint, itself, about the actual role played by them at the material point of time, when the offence is committed by the Company. No prosecution would lie against a person or persons as the case may be on the simple accusation in the complaint that such person or persons were the Director, Executive Director or an officer of the company at the material time when the offence was committed by the company. But at the same time it is equally well settled that this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 cr. P. C. would not normally undertake any roving enquiry to find out as to the truth or otherwise of the allegations and accusations made in the complaint. The court cannot undertake any further enquiry if clear specific and unambiguous allegations are made against each of the persons arrayed as accused in the complaint about the role played at the material time when the offence is committed by the company. Mere repetition of the words incorporated in Section 141 of the Act would not meet the requirement in law to rope in any and every director, or other officer, manager, secretary of the company as the case may be. There must be something more clearly stated in the complaint. A bald allegation by merely repeating those magic words mentioned in Section 141 of the Act would not meet the requirements in law to rope in any and every director, or other officer, manager, secretary of the company as the case may be. There must be something more clearly stated in the complaint. A bald allegation by merely repeating those magic words mentioned in Section 141 of the Act would not be enough. But in case where the complaint discloses the factual foundation against the persons arrayed as accused, the High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction cannot interdict the further enquiry and trial. "


( 11 ) STRONG reliance was also placed on mukesh Gupta v. Kabsons Gas Equipment limited, Hyderabad and another (2nd cited) where ?a complaint was filed against the company and also the Directors of the company and petitioner is one of the said Direc

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

tors - No allegation made in the complaint that he was in-charge of the business of the company - Only general allegation made that A-2 to a-14 connived with each other and got the cheque issued. It was held that complaint against the petitioner is not maintainable. " ( 12 ) THE learned Magistrate recorded reasons in detail and also had taken into consideration the fact that A-2 and A-3 alone had been transacting this transaction with the appellant-complainant and further in view of the fact that A-4 had not issued any cheque and also if Exs. P-2, P-10 and P-22 are taken into consideration, A-4 cannot be fastened with any criminal liability, an order of acquittal was made as against A-4. ( 13 ) IN the light of the reasons recorded in detail by the learned Magistrate and in view of the fact that this is an appeal as against an order of acquittal, unless it is shown by the counsel for the appellant that the reasons recorded by the learned Magistrate are either perverse or based on total misappreciation of the evidence available on record, the said findings cannot be disturbed. The learned counsel was unable to show any compelling reasons so as to disturb the said findings recorded while recording the acquittal. Hence, the acquittal recorded by the learned magistrate against A-4 is hereby confirmed. ( 14 ) NO merit in the appeal and accordingly the criminal appeal shall stand dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

13-01-2020 Union of India rep. By its Enforcement Officer Enforcement Directorate Chennai Versus M/s. Raiments & Garments International, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-01-2020 The General Manager, Aleppy Parcel Service, Alappuzha Versus Anil Kumar V., Managing Partner, Wetex Garments, Poovattuparamba, Kozhikode Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
22-11-2019 The Management Scotts Garments Limited, Trippur Versus The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-10-2019 M/s. PJS Knit Garments, Rep.by its Partner, P. Sugansaran & Another Versus The Authorised Officer, Bank of Baroda, Tirupur Main Branch, Tirupur High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-08-2019 M/s. Indo Skins Garments Private Limited, Represented by its Managing Director, N. Thiagarajan, Chennai Versus The Presiding Officer, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2019 The Officer In Charge, Sub-Regional Provident Fund Office & Another Versus M/s Godavari Garments Limited Supreme Court of India
05-04-2019 The District Collector, Kanchipuram Versus M/s. Gupta Garments, Rep. by its Authorized Signatory Anil Gupta & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2019 M/s. Ginni Garments & Another Versus M/s. Sethi Garments & Others High Court of Punjab and Haryana
04-04-2019 Ginni Garments and Others V/S Sethi Garments and Others. In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
13-03-2019 The Senior Divisional Mechanical Engineer, Southern Railway, Salem Division & Others Versus M/s. Premier Garments Processing, Rep. by its Proprietor Ibrahim Sha, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-12-2018 Batra Garments Pvt. Ltd. Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-12-2018 Goodluck Garments Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Cus., Surat-II High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
24-09-2018 M/s. Premier Garments Processing, Rep. by its Proprietor, Ibrahim Sha, Chennai Versus The Divisional Railway Manager, Salem & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2018 Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd., (Now ECGC Limited), Chennai & Another Versus Zoro Garments Private Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director, N.F. Mogrella High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-07-2018 M/s. Rasathe Garments, Rep by its Partner, Virudhunagar Versus The Commercial Tax Officer-I, Virudhunagar High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-07-2018 Bord for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction (B.I.F.R.) Versus Coromandel Garments Ltd. & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-04-2018 M/s. Sri Rengas Avitta Garments, Represented by its Partner, R. Rajaram & Another Versus R. Indira High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2018 Kandukuri Garments Versus Inspector of Legal Metrology High Court of Karnataka
02-01-2018 A. Velumurugan Versus M/s. Sree Shiva Sakthi Garments, Represented by its Partner Venkatachalam, Tiruppur High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-07-2017 Creative Garments Pvt. Ltd V/S C.C.E. & S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad
10-02-2017 The Management of Foundation Garments Pvt. Ltd. Represented by its Managing Director ?Divine Grace? Versus Government of Tamil Nadu Labour & Employment (A1) Department, Represented by its Principal Secretary High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-01-2017 R.K. Rajkumar Proprietor M/s. Koghima Garments Versus The Registrar Debts Recovery Tribunal - III Spencer Towers Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-01-2017 Kitex Garments Ltd., represented by its Managing Director-Sabu M. Jacob Versus State of Kerala, represented by Principal Secretary To Government, Taxes (H) Department & Another High Court of Kerala
02-01-2017 Sonal Garments V/S Commr. of Cus., Seaport (Import), Chennai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
15-09-2016 M/s. Rasathe Garments Versus The Commercial Tax Officer-I (FAC) Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
02-09-2016 Carol Garments & Another Versus The Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Coimbatore & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-06-2016 M/s. Oxygen the Digital Shop, Pulimoottil Arcade, Kottayam & Another Versus Namadevan.L., Anna Garments & Others Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
12-02-2016 M/s. Anjal Garments Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-08-2015 Provident Fund Commissioner Versus M/s. Bena Garments High Court of Judicature at Bombay
05-06-2015 M/s. Triven Garments Ltd., represented by its Managing Director & Others Versus State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-02-2015 SCM Garments (P.) Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-III, Coimbatore Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai
18-12-2014 Nelly Garments Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
26-11-2014 Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-II Versus Ankit Garments Manufacturing Co. High Court of Delhi
07-11-2014 KMC Textiles & Garments, rep.by its Proprietor, Shaj Mohammed Versus The Chief Manager & Authorized Officer, Indian Bank, Trichy Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
24-10-2014 Board of Investment of Sri Lanka Versus Million Garments (PVT) Ltd. Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
28-08-2014 Sakthi Fashions, Manufacturers & Exporters of Fabrics and Garments, Represented by its Proprietrix Versus Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd, Represented by its General Manager Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chennai
11-06-2014 National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus M/s. Ess Ell Garments Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chandigarh
01-05-2014 Sri Priyaluckshmi Garments Represented by Mrs. G. Mahalakshmi, Partner & Others Versus The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
29-04-2014 Vijay Karlekar, Proprietor, M/s. New Keerthi Garments & Another Versus Karnataka State Financial Corporation & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-04-2014 In Re Jagadamba Garments Marketing Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
26-02-2014 M/s. Lakshya Garments through its Proprietor Versus National Insurance Company Limited National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-09-2013 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Versus M/s. Anjali Silks & Garments High Court of Karnataka
26-04-2013 M/s. Viking Garments, (A Partnership Firm) Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
09-04-2013 A.J. Ramadoss Versus S. Padmavathy and N. Sankar(spouse) Om Siva Sakthi Garments National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-11-2012 CC&CE, Guntur Versus M/s. Kandukuri Garments (P) Ltd. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Bangalore
12-10-2012 M/s. C.S. Garments & Another Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Tirupur High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-08-2012 Commissioner of Income Tax Versus First Garments Manufacturing Co. India (P) Ltd High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-06-2012 M/s. Amex Garments Pvt. Ltd. Ekkattuthangal, Guindy, Rep. by Director Versus The Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-04-2012 M/s. Kitex Garments Ltd. Versus CC, Cochin Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Bangalore
23-12-2011 M/S. Shyam Garments & Others Versus State Bank Of India High Court of Delhi
09-11-2011 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Koregaon Branch Soham Bldg., Rahimatpur Road, Koregaon, Dist. Versus M/s. Prinita Garments Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Mumbai
03-11-2011 Levi Strauss & Company Versus Nizami Garments High Court of Delhi
25-07-2011 Commissioner of Customs Versus Kitex Garments High Court of Kerala
14-07-2011 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Somesh Readymade Garments National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
12-04-2011 Anthony Garments Pvt., Ltd., Represented by A. Joseph Antony, Managing Director Versus The Commercial Tax Officer & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
15-03-2011 M/s.Gayatri Garments Represented by its proprietor Shri.B.Selvakumar Versus Smt.S.Valambal, Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds) High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-02-2011 M/s. V.K.T. Rajkumar Garments Versus The Colonel, Colonel Administration for Commendent, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-11-2010 M/s. T.K.T. Garments Versus The Manager Sri Balaji Transport Lines & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-10-2010 Dandy Garments Erode Versus The Employees State Insurance Corpn & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-09-2010 M/s. Shyam Garments & Others V/S State Bank of India Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal At Delhi
18-08-2010 Tvl. V. Win Garments Rep. by its Proprietor Versus The Additional Deputy Commercial Tax Officer High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-08-2010 M/s. Stallion Garments Versus CC, Tuticorin Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
30-07-2010 M/s. Muthuraman Exports (Presently known as M/s. Perfect Stitch Garments P Ltd) Versus The Customs & Central Excise & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-07-2010 A. Sridhar Lakshman Versus M/s. Merbanc Financial Services Ltd. Rep. by Official Liquidator & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
07-07-2010 Vijay S/o Shamrao Bhale Versus Godavari Garments Ltd. & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
16-03-2010 Peoples Bank Versus Lokuge International Garments Ltd. Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
18-02-2010 The Management of M/s. Stallion Garments Versus The Presiding Officer Labour Court, Salem & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-02-2010 M/s. Fine Fit Garments Versus CC, Chennai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
04-01-2010 M/s Shri Ram Garments & Another & Accessories Versus CCE, Meerut Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
07-08-2009 M/s. Bhakti Garments Versus Subhash B. Vishwakarma In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
29-06-2009 Riya Garments Private Limited v/s Pratap Rajasthan Copper Foils and Laminations Limited and Others Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal At Delhi
20-05-2009 Awadheswari Prasad Narain Singh Versus Priti Garments Patna High Court of Bihar
16-05-2009 Persian Leather Garments Versus Commissioner, Industries & Commerce & Others High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
17-04-2009 Chander Sain & Others Versus J.B. Garments High Court of Delhi
24-02-2009 Kitex Garments Ltd., Versus State Of Kerala High Court of Kerala
05-01-2009 Futuristics Garments Pvt. Ltd. Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Securities Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
18-12-2008 I.T.C. Limited Versus Deepak Garments High Court of Delhi
23-09-2008 Southern Export Corporation A. Rajagopalan Versus Vijayseema Garments And Hosiery Private Limited High Court of Delhi
26-06-2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Ashapura Garments Pvt. Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
24-08-2007 CCE Salem Versus V.Tex Garments Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
09-08-2007 P. Vijaya Raghunathan Versus M/s. Green Cotton Garments rep. by its Managing Directors & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-03-2007 Garments India Exports and Another v/s Dhanalakshmi Bank Limited and Another Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal At Chennai
15-02-2007 Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation Versus J.S. Garments High Court of Judicature at Bombay
23-01-2007 Elegant Garments Versus Regional Provident Fund Commissioner High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-12-2006 (1) In Re : Rbr Knit Process Private Limited; (2) In Re :Rbr Clothings Private Limited; (3) In Re : Rbr Garments Private Limited High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-10-2006 Angel Garments Limited Versus DIT (International Taxation)Chennai Authority For Advance Rulings Income Tax New Delhi
26-10-2006 Kerala Textile and Garments Dealer Welfare Association and Another Versus The State of Kerale High Court of Kerala
16-03-2006 La Chemise Lacoste & Another Versus R.H. Garments & Others High Court of Delhi
14-03-2006 Rita Garments Versus Sh. Ghanshyam Bajaj High Court of Delhi
19-08-2005 Sundaram Finance Services Ltd., rep. by its President, the Principal Officer, having its Office at Deshabandhu Plaza, No. 47, Whites Road, Chennai Versus Shoba Garments (P) Ltd., No. 127-B, Brickkiln Road, Norton Shanmuga Building, II Floor, Purasawalkam, Chennai-600 007 and others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-07-2004 Garments India Exporters Versus Director of Enforcement Appellate Tribunal For Foreign Exchange New Delhi
21-06-2004 M/s.S.M. Garments Private Limited Versus Inspector General of Registration & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-03-2004 Radhamani India Ltd., Decree-holder Versus Imperial Garments Ltd High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
15-03-2004 Venkateshwara Garments and Exports and Another V/S Dena Bank Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal At Mumbai
07-11-2003 Modesty Garments Versus Union of India High Court of Delhi
10-02-2003 M/s.Amarjothi Spinning Mills Ltd. Versus M/s. B.R.B.Garments High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-11-2002 The Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited, rep. by its Madras North Branch Senior Manager Versus M.S. Gopal, Proprietor, Suki Garments & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-10-2002 M/s. Shanthi Garments Pvt. Ltd. Versus Regional Provident Fund, Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-08-2002 Sonal Garments Versus Trimbak Shankar Karve High Court of Judicature at Bombay
30-04-2002 M/s. Chevron Garments (P) Ltd. 1986 Trichy Main Road, Singanallur, Coimbatore, Rep. by its Managing Director S. Ramanathan Versus Sri Malini Spinning Mills Ltd. (Formerly P.A. Mills Ltd.) Trichy Main Road, Ammapalayam Village Sandhiyur, Attayampatty (via) Mallur, Salem-636 203. Rep. by its Chief Accountant K.S.S. Prakaash High Court of Judicature at Madras