Skip to content


Maddi Venkataratnam and Company Private Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectExcise
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case Number Writ Petitions Nos. 4767 and 4773 of 1978
Judge
Reported in1993(42)ECC204
AppellantMaddi Venkataratnam and Company Private Limited
RespondentUnion of India (Uoi) and ors.
DispositionPetition allowed
Cases ReferredIndian Leaf Tobacco Development Company Limited and I.T.C. Limited v. The Union of India
Excerpt:
- .....central government, who now appears, submits that certain points of law were not placed before this court at the time the earlier petition was argued and that the matter requires reconsideration. it is stated that the respondents are filing an appeal against the judgment in the earlier writ petition. inasmuch as it is stated that these writ petitions are covered by the earlier decision and the only argument is that certain points of law were not properly placed before this court on the earlier occasion, i do not think that there is any justification for reconsideration of the matter.2. in these circumstances, following the earlier decision, these writ petitions are allowed, but in the circumstances without costs.
Judgment:
ORDER

Padmanabhan, J.

1. The question agitated in these writ petitions are covered by the decision in' Indian Leaf Tobacco Development Company Limited and I.T.C. Limited v. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi and Ors. (W.P. Nos.3025 and 3026 of 1978) [reported in 1984] 1 ECC 266 (Mad) Mr. R. Thyagarajan, the Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Government, who now appears, submits that certain points of law were not placed before this Court at the time the earlier petition was argued and that the matter requires reconsideration. It is stated that the respondents are filing an appeal against the judgment in the earlier writ petition. Inasmuch as it is stated that these writ petitions are covered by the earlier decision and the only argument is that certain points of law were not properly placed before this Court on the earlier occasion, I do not think that there is any justification for reconsideration of the matter.

2. In these circumstances, following the earlier decision, these writ petitions are allowed, but in the circumstances without costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //