2265 dated August 9, 1958, formed the basis of companysideration of the companypeting claims before the authorities companycerned.
The State Transport Appellate Tribunal heard those and the other appeals together, and disposed them of by a companymon judgment dated December 30, 1960.
The High Court allowed N. Sudaresa Thevars writ petition by its judgment dated February 11, 1964, quashed the Tribunals order and directed it to dispose of the appeals afresh in accordance with its order.
The writ petition of Vasavi Transport Company was however dismissed in limine on March 1, 1962.
Madhavamani Transport P Ltd. and Vasavi Transport Company felt aggrieved and filed their appeals.
In its impugned judgment dated October 9, 1964 in writ appeal No.
The Regional Transport Authorily, Thanjavur, granted a permit to N. Sundaresa Thevar to ply a stage carriage on Pattukottai Sirmelkudi route.
2265 which was entirely outside the purview of Section 43 A of the Motor Vehicles Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, it was needless to go into the merits of the companytentions of the parties.
38 of 1963 dated August 5, 1964, in these circumstances.
314 of 1962 .
As appeals No.
38 of 1963 by Vasani Transport Company.
64 of 1964 by M s. Madhavamani Transport P Ltd. and No.
It set aside the order in favour of N. Sundaresan Thevar and granted the permit to Madhavamani Transport P Ltd. N. Sundaresa Thevar thereupon filed a writ petition No.
64 of 1964 , the High Court has taken the view that as the Tribunal felt the companystraining influence of the G.O. No.
Vasavi Transport Company also filed a writ petition No.
64 of 1964 has been dismissed by the judgment dated October 9, 1964, and appeal No.
38 of 1963 has been allowed by the judgment dated August 5, 1964, the present two appeals have been filed on certificate granted by the High Court.
106 of 1961 in the Madras High Court.
64 of 1964 dated October 9, 1964, and No.
N. Singhal, J. These two appeals by certificates arise out of judgments of the Madras High Court in writ appeals No.
That had to writ appeals No.
