While considering the rival submission, the Madras High Court observed that the petitioner was knowing about the commercial use of the building not only at the time of vacation from the office but also while working with his senior in the same building.
A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the petition, Madras High Court found that to seek the direction aforesaid, the petitioner has made a reference of the arrangement in the State of Andhra Pradesh, where, according to the petitioner, their exist check dams at every 1.5 kms of the river flow.
A single-judge bench of Madras High Court observed that in law and on the clear language of Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 , the impugned retention of the vehicle is clearly invalid.
The PIL in Madras High Court filed by one S.Viduthlaivalavan also made a prayer to cancel the Patta issued in favour of the alleged non-existing Temple, namely "Arulmigu Santhappar Swamy Temple".
While considering the petition, Madras High Court pointed, when a representation of nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondents to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely.