- Case number
- CMA(PT) 42/2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Outcome
- Remanded
Headnote
Nine-tenths of the order was a reproduction of the hearing notice, leaving a single non-speaking paragraph to reject the applicant's explanation, and it decided the original nineteen claims rather than the eleven as amended at the hearing. The work of a Controller may be technical, but it is subject to judicial review, where the Court will look for some tangible and objective reason to justify the order.
Disposition
Allowed. Impugned order set aside and the matter remanded for de novo consideration.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.