Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 46 views

    SC Ramco Judgment

    Uploaded by

    Astha Ahuja
    This document provides a summary of a Supreme Court of India ruling on several petitions. The Court dismissed the petitions based on previous rulings from several High Courts and the Supreme Court itself. The Court found that the view of the Madras High Court in the impugned judgment was consistent with previous rulings from nine other High Courts. Given this consistency among the High Courts and previous dismissals by the Supreme Court, the Court declined to interfere with the petitions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    SC Ramco Judgment

    Uploaded by

    Astha Ahuja
    46 views3 pages
    This document provides a summary of a Supreme Court of India ruling on several petitions. The Court dismissed the petitions based on previous rulings from several High Courts and the Supreme Court itself. The Court found that the view of the Madras High Court in the impugned judgment was consistent with previous rulings from nine other High Courts. Given this consistency among the High Courts and previous dismissals by the Supreme Court, the Court declined to interfere with the petitions.

    Original Description:

    Judgment

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document provides a summary of a Supreme Court of India ruling on several petitions. The Court dismissed the petitions based on previous rulings from several High Courts and the Supreme Court itself. The Court found that the view of the Madras High Court in the impugned judgment was consistent with previous rulings from nine other High Courts. Given this consistency among the High Courts and previous dismissals by the Supreme Court, the Court declined to interfere with the petitions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    46 views3 pages

    SC Ramco Judgment

    Uploaded by

    Astha Ahuja
    This document provides a summary of a Supreme Court of India ruling on several petitions. The Court dismissed the petitions based on previous rulings from several High Courts and the Supreme Court itself. The Court found that the view of the Madras High Court in the impugned judgment was consistent with previous rulings from nine other High Courts. Given this consistency among the High Courts and previous dismissals by the Supreme Court, the Court declined to interfere with the petitions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    LL 2021 SC 191 WWW.LIVELAW.

    IN

    ITEM NO.16 Court 4 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XII

    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

    Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).15785-15788/2020

    (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09-03-2020


    in WA No. 3403/2019 09-03-2020 in WA No. 3413/2019 09-03-2020 in WA
    No. 3414/2019 09-03-2020 in WA No. 2812/2019 passed by the High
    Court Of Judicature At Madras)

    THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES & ANR. ETC. Petitioner(s)

    VERSUS

    THE RAMCO CEMENTS LTD.ETC. Respondent(s)

    (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.134685/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING


    C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT.

    Date : 24-03-2021 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

    CORAM :
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI

    For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv.


    Mr. Jayanth Muth Raj, Sr. Adv.
    Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR
    Mr. RajaRajeshwaran. S, Adv.
    Mr. Muthuchharan Sundresh, Adv.
    Mr. Aditya Chadha, Adv.
    Ms. Uma Prasuna Bachu, Adv.

    For Respondent(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.


    Mr. R.L. Ramani, Sr. Adv.
    Mr. N. Prasad, Adv.
    Mr. K. K. Mani, AOR
    Ms. T. Archana, Adv.

    Mr. K. V. Viswanathan, Sr. Adv.


    Mr. Anil Kaushik, Adv.
    Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Adv.
    Mrs. Shashi Sharma, Adv.
    Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, AOR
    LL 2021 SC 191 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

    UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following


    O R D E R

    Heard learned counsel for the parties at

    length.

    We are in agreement with the view taken by

    the Punjab and Haryana High Court in ‘Carpo Power

    Limited vs. State of Haryana & Ors.’, which has

    already been upheld by this Court by dismissing

    Special Leave Petition (C) No.20572 of 2018 vide

    order dated 13th August, 2018.

    The High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi has

    also dealt with the same issue in ‘Tata Steel

    Limited vs. State of Jharkhand’ reported in 2019

    SCC online Jharkhand 1255. This judgment, in our

    opinion, is exhaustive and answers all the points

    urged before us by the petitioner(s) in the instant

    special leave petitions.

    It is brought to our notice that nine High

    Courts have taken the same view. Even the decision

    of the High Court of Rajasthan has been affirmed by

    this Court by dismissal of Special Leave Petition

    (C) No.27529 of 2019 and connected cases vide order

    dated 3rd February, 2020.


    LL 2021 SC 191 WWW.LIVELAW.IN

    Considering the consistent view of nine High

    Courts, including dismissal of special leave

    petitions by different Bench of this Court, and

    being satisfied about the exposition on the matters

    in issue by the High Court of Madras vide impugned

    judgment and order being a possible view, we

    decline to interfere in these special leave

    petitions.

    Notably, after the decision of Punjab and

    Haryana High Court even the Union of India has

    chosen to act upon the said decision by issuing

    Office Memorandum dated 1st November, 2018 and

    directing all the States/Union Territories to

    follow the view taken by the Punjab and Haryana

    High Court.

    Hence, we see no reason to reopen the entire

    matter. The special leave petitions are accordingly

    dismissed.

    Consequently, all pending applications shall

    also stand disposed of.

    (NEETU KHAJURIA) (VIDYA NEGI)


    COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

    You might also like