Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO
Sarvaraya Textiles Employees Group Gratuity Trust – Appellant
Versus
Debt Recovery Tribunal – II, rep. by its Registrar, Hyderabad – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed to quash tribunal judgment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
ORDER :
B.R. Madhusudhan Rao, J.
1. The Writ of Certiorari is filed by the petitioners to quash the judgment passed by the respondent No.1 in OA.No.2832 of 2017, dated 31.05.2019.
2. Respondent No.2 - Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as LIC henceforth) has filed OA.No.2832 of 2017 (Old OA.No.1381 of 1999 of DRT-1, Hyderabad) under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act, 1993’) for recovery of Rs.44,04,025/- from the defendants/petitioners herein jointly and severally together with costs and future interest @ 14% per annum with quarterly rests from the date of filing O.A. till the date of realization.
3. LIC has examined Sri R.Murali, Assistant Secretary (L & HPF) as AW.1, got marked Exs.A1 to A27. Defendants have examined Sri S.B.P.S. Krishna Mohan, Managing Director of defendant No.2- company as DW.1.
4.1. The Tribunal after going through the evidence and documents has allowed the O.A. directing the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Corporation a sum of Rs.44,04,025/- with future
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
