[03/10, 10:13] Vinothpandian: 2007 (3) SCC ( cri ) 353 : state of UP vs lalloo singh : Where vehicle seized by officials under wild life protection act , section 457 CRPC has no application[03/10, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2015 (2) DRTC 836 : Hdfc bank ltd mumbai & others vs prestige educational trust : section 13 (4) of the SARFASI act not conferred any power on secured creditor to take possession of any assets other than secured assets , if attempted its ultravires to provisions of act[03/10, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2012 (2) DRTC 104 : mohinder pal singh vs state bank of india : section 13 (7) of the SARFASI act authorises secured creditor to claim charges , costs, and expenses which are actually incurred[03/10, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2004 (12) SCC 336 : Damodar vs state of Rajasthan : Any telephonic information about commission of cognizable offence irrespective of nature and details of such information cannot be treated as FIR[03/10, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2019 (4) SCC 767 : Ripudaman singh vs balkrishna : cheque issued by purchaser of a property not honoured , disputes cannot be considered in petition under section 482 CRPC , such disputes to be considered only in regular trial
[03/10, 10:13] Vinothpandian: 2007 (3) SCC ( cri ) 353 : state of UP vs lalloo singh : Where vehicle seized by officials under wild life protection act , section 457 CRPC has no application
[03/10, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2015 (2) DRTC 836 : Hdfc bank ltd mumbai & others vs prestige educational trust : section 13 (4) of the SARFASI act not conferred any power on secured creditor to take possession of any assets other than secured assets , if attempted its ultravires to provisions of act
[03/10, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2012 (2) DRTC 104 : mohinder pal singh vs state bank of india : section 13 (7) of the SARFASI act authorises secured creditor to claim charges , costs, and expenses which are actually incurred
[03/10, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2004 (12) SCC 336 : Damodar vs state of Rajasthan : Any telephonic information about commission of cognizable offence irrespective of nature and details of such information cannot be treated as FIR
[03/10, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2019 (4) SCC 767 : Ripudaman singh vs balkrishna : cheque issued by purchaser of a property not honoured , disputes cannot be considered in petition under section 482 CRPC , such disputes to be considered only in regular trial
![09/06, 12:27] sekarreporter1: [09/06, 12:25] sekarreporter1: https://x.com/sekarreporter1/status/1799696764062281801?t=8kv71rQ79pA80ZqtNXyTmQ&s=08[09/06, 12:26] sekarreporter1: பிணத்தை மாற்றி கொடுத்ததால் ரூ.2 லட்சம் இழப்பீடு தர உத்தரவு Adv former SGP Govindaraj argued before Anitha sumanth judge[09/06, 12:30] sekarreporter1: 1W.P.No. 933 of 2023Dr.ANITA SUMANTH, J.The specific direction under order dated 15.02.2018 is that the representation seeking enhanced compensation is to be decided by thesecond respondent, who is the Secretary, Health Department.](https://sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)