Two-judge bench dismissed Writ Appeal No.1520 of 2013 for want of prosecution due to non-appearance of the petitioner/appellant during hearings.
Writ Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution. No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.11.2019
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE DR.VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.A.No.1520 of 2013
VINAYAGA ALLOYS (P) LTD., 2A Prince Apartments, 59, Ormes Road, Chennai-600 010. ... Appellant -vsState Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd., rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, 19A, Rukmani Lakshmipathi Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. ... Respondent
Writ Appeal filed under Section 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 10.01.2013, in dismissing the W.P.No.7162 of 2005.
Prayer in W.P.No.7162 of 2005:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated ID/ST/VAL/95 dated 4.3.2003 and to quash the same and to direct the respondent to issue Eligibility Certificate for Capitalsubsidy relating unit II of M/s.Vinayaka Alloys Limited at 48-E Sipcot Industrial Complex, Gummidipoondi
For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondent : No appearance
O R D E R
(Judgment of the Court was made by Dr.Vineet Kothari, J )
When the matter came up for hearing on 30.10.2019, there was no representation on the side of the petitioner. Therefore, this matter was directed to be posted on 06.11.2019 under the caption “for dismissal” and the matter was listed today.
rsv[co] srg 10/12/2019
Vinayaga Alloys (P) Ltd.
State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd.
Vineet Kothari
C. Saravanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
