Dismissed

Shiva Texyarn Ltd. v. the Superintendent

Madras HC12 Oct 2017WA/1031/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

These writ appeals sought to set aside orders denying market fees on cotton waste sales during export. The Single Bench held the issue was settled by a prior Division Bench judgment and dismissed the appeals accordingly.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeals filed by Shiva Texyarn Limited and Vishnuram Textiles Limited were dismissed, following the earlier Division Bench judgment.

Shiva Texyarn Ltd. Vs the Superintendent — Property and Title | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 12.10.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN

¶5

And THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

W.A.Nos.1031 and 1032 of 2013

¶7

And M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2013

¶8

Shiva Texyarn Limited, Repd. By its Manager V.Suresh ... Appellant in W.A.1031 of 2013

¶9

Vishnuram Textiles Limited Repd. By its Finance Manager S.Radhakrishnan ... Appellant in W.A.1032 of 2013 Vs.

¶10

The Superintendent, Regulated Market Committee, Coimbatore Market Committee, Sulur, Coimbatore – 641 401.

¶11

State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Secretary to Government, Agriculture Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009. ... Respondents in W.A.1031 of 2013

¶12

The Superintendent of Market, Regulated Market, Coimbatore Market Committee, Udumalpet – 642 128, Coimbatore District. ... Respondent in W.A..1032 of 2013

¶13

Common Prayer:

¶14

Writ appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order and judgment of the learned Judge made in W.P.Nos.23319 of 2010 and 25579 of 2007 respectively, dated 17.07.2012.

¶15

W.P.Nos.23319 of 2010 and 25579 of 2007 : Petitions persented to this Court to issue

¶16

i) a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents herein or their men or agents or subordinates or person acting on their

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

behalf from demanding or levying market fee on the sale of Cotton waste where such sale takes place in the course of export of Cotton waste out of the territory of India.

¶19

ii) Writ of Certiorari, Calling for records of the respondent in his first and final notice No.DN 441/2007 dated 2.7.2007 issued by the respondent relating to levying of market committee cess of Rs.5,29,290/- and quash the same as arbitrary, unlawful, violative of principles of natural justice, colourable exercise of powers without application of mind and also against the provisions as contained under section 24(1) of the Tamilnadu Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulations) Act, 1987.

¶20

For Appellants : Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj

¶21

For Respondents : Mr.V.Jaya Prakash Narayanan for R1

¶22

The issue involved in these intra Court appeals is covered by a Judgment of the Division Bench dated 23.09.2016 in W.A.Nos.69 and 70 of 2012.

¶23

2.The learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents fairly submitted that the issue is no longer res integra in view of the above decision of the Division Bench.

¶24

3.Accordingly, by following the Judgment dated 23.09.2016 in W.A.Nos.69 and 70 of 2012, these two intra Court appeals are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶26

pri

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶28

¶29

The Superintendent,
Regulated Market Committee,
Coimbatore Market Committee,
Sulur, Coimbatore – 641 401.
2. The Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu,
Agriculture Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009.
3. The Superintendent of Market,
Regulated Market,
Coimbatore Market Committee,
Udumalpet – 642 128,
Coimbatore District.
+1cc to Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj, Advocate, S.R.No.73250
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.73709
W.A.Nos.1031 and 1032 of 2013
and
M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2013
NM(CO)
CA(21/11/2017)

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Shiva Texyarn Ltd. v. the Superintendent

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiva Texyarn Ltd. v. the Superintendent

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Veeraiyan, Vs State of Tamilnadu

The Land Acquisition Officer Vs Jothi Kumar

P. Anand (Minor) Vs the Directorate of Government

K.Murugananthan Vs the District Collector

Tamil Nadu Housing Board Vs G.Karthic Kannan

Land Acquisition Officer & Vs Rathinam