Advanced Search Results

Ayyappa Spices vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

Court : Kerala

or after procuringcardamom, which meets the standards prescribed in the Regulations framed under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, after obtaining test report from the Government Analyst’s Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram.3. The order 11.01.2023 was followed by another orderdated … and the Devaswom Board itself as the 6th accused. After referring to the provisions under clause (xiii) of Section 2 of the said Act, which define ‘sale’, and theprovisions under Section 16(1)(a), the learned Single Judge heldthat storing … copy of this judgment. The 1st respondent Travancore Devaswom Board shall initiate appropriate proceedings against the 5th respondent-contractor for violation of the tender conditions and

Sharad Bansilal Vakil Vs. Suo Motu

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Contempt of Court

Acts : Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 2, 5, 14(1), 14(2), 15, 17, 18, 18(1), 19, 19(1) and 20; Companies Act, 1913 - Sections 170 and 202; Contempt of Courts (Gujarat High Court) Rules, 1984 - Rule 11; Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act - Sections 13B; Constitution of India - Articles 136 and 215

Reported in : (2006)2GLR1707

Matched in: Citation (2006)2GLR1707

Azizunissa Begum and anr. Vs. BasheeruddIn Babu Khan and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : PropertyCivil

Acts : Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 - Sections 2, 4, 8, 8(2) and 8(6); Court of Wards Act; Inams Abolition Act, 1955 - Sections 9; Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976; Income Tax Act, 1963; Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 55(1); Limitation Act 1963 - Sections 14; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : 2008(4)ALD292; 2008(4)ALT614

that the petitioners have to proceed against the respondents 1 and 2 for any alleged misdeeds in an appropriate forum, if so advised, and it is for the petitioners to find out how respondents 3 to 22 … ORDERG. Bhavani Prasad, J.1. The dismissal of LGC (SR) No. 4200 of 2006 at the stage of admission by the order dated 28-2-2007 of the … possession of the respondents cannot be termed as possession without lawful entitlement, and hence, the essential ingredients of Section 2 (d) and (e) of the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, are unavailable. While noting the unusuality of giving

Basanthilal Aggarwal and anr. Vs. P.S. Bhamdari and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Property

Acts : Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 - Sections 2, 4 and 8; Transfer of Property Act - Sections 82 and 92; Delhi Rent Control Act - Sections 21; Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 34

Reported in : 2007(3)ALD805; 2007(2)ALT566

mentioned in Clause (e) of Section 2 of the Act.12. It is appropriate here to quote the observations of the Apex Court in State of … in Hindustan Aeronautics Employees Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Special Court (Land Grabbing) : AIR2005AP76 (L.B.) (same as No. 3) had to consider the definition of the expressions 'land grabber' and 'land grabbing'. Recently in N. Srinivasa Rao … a case of land grabbing.14. In N. Srinivasa Rao v. Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act 2006 (4) ALT 29 (SC) : 2006 (4) SCJ 328 the Apex Court held in para 46 thus:The attempts … to curb the activity of land grabbing by the unscrupulous elements and mafia. Clauses (d) and (e) of Section 2 of the Act seek to define the expressions 'land grabber' and 'land grabbing' respectively. They read as under:2(6)

Executive Engineer, Sundargarh Irrigation Division and Two ors. Vs. Sr ...

Court : Orissa

Subject : Arbitration

Reported in : AIR2007Ori78; 2007(2)ARBLR486(Orissa); 103(2007)CLT226

was raised, it was expressed by this Court, that the Learned Arbitrator will consider the same and pass appropriate orders.3. Consequent to the above order passed by this Court, the State filed a preliminary counter statement before … was transferred to the Arbitration Tribunal and the said Tribunal passed an ex parte award under the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Old Act). In Misc. Case No. 429 of 1992 arising out of … which Misc. Case No. 154 of 1990 was filed by him under Section 5 of the Old Act for appointment of a Special Arbitration Tribunal … State as Petitioners, calling in question the legality of the order dated 28.12.2002 passed by the Learned Arbitrator, Justice Shri P.C. Mishra, former Judge of

M/s. United White Metals Limited Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : MRTP

four employees i.e. Respondent Nos.4 to 7, who addressed a demand letter dated 13 January 2006 to the Appropriate Authority for themselves and purportedly on behalf of some 31 others, who are under cover by the two … The challenge in the two Petitions is directed against the Order dated 22 December 2006 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Mumbai, referring under … consequently there was no unfair labour practice involved. The Labour Court, by its common judgment and order dated 30 August 2005 observed that the transfer of the employees was with their consent, but ruled that it did … Commissioner of Labour, Mumbai, referring under Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ("said Act"), a dispute with the following terms of the reference:

Mukesh Jagdishbhai Vasava Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 2(1), 4, 7A, 7A(2) and 29; Births and Deaths Registration Act, 1969; Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 - Rule 12 and 12(3); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 313, 397 and 401; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 306, 376, 342 and 506(2)

Reported in : (2009)1GLR117

Act, the Court has no jurisdiction to try the case and it is required to be transferred to appropriate Court.2.2 After hearing, the learned trial Judge came to conclusion that the birth-date was not got registered by … Bankim N. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner-accused has filed this Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ['the Code' for short] and challenged the … 1, Bharuch, below application, Exhibit 69 in Sessions Case No. 88 of 2006.2. The petitioner-accused is being prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 376,

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Minati Das and Others

Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

Subject : MRTP

respondent has been taking gas cylinder continuously for the purpose of his domestic use from respondent no. 5. 3. The respondent on 06.01.2003 took gas cylinder from OP no. 1 through spot delivery by the staff of … In BalwantSingh Vs. Jagdish Singh and Ors., (Civil Appeal no. 1166 of 2006), decided by the Apex Court on 08.07.2010 it was held: œThe party … of Issues (b) and (c). The question of law raised is left open to be decided in an appropriate case. 32. In the light of the above discussion, the appeals fail and are dismissed on the ground … 2012 has been filed under section 21 (B) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 08.11.2011 passed by the Tripura State Consumer … Gupta, Member 1. Revision Petition no. 1263 of 2012 has been filed under section 21 (B) of

The Management of Best and Crompton Engineering Limited Vs. A.M.Sekar ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 2-A(2), 17B, 25-N, 33

batch, dated 5.11.2008, it is informed that the employee in W.P.No.11860 of 2006 (G.Sumathi I.D.No.633 of 2002), the employee in W.P.No.11539 of 2006 (K.U.Suresh Kumar … establishment covered under Chapter VB of the Act and in the absence of any prior permission from the appropriate Government as required under Section 25N(1)(b) and 25N(7) of the Act, the retrenchment is illegal and when the … loss due to recession and decided to retrench 48 employees, viz., 13 employees from the administrative office and 35 employees from various units, on payment of compensation. It is stated that out of 48 employees, 35 employees … before the Labour Court (hereinafter referred to as the employee(s)) under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity, the Act) directing the

Sudhir S. Mehta and ors. Vs. Custodian and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 - Sections 3, 3(1), 3(2), 3(3), 4(1), 4(2), 5, 7, 9A, 10, 11, 11(1) and 11(2); Income Tax Act; Companies Act

Reported in : JT2008(7)SC169; [2008]85SCL91(SC); 2008AIRSCW4411

members of late Sh. Harshad S. Mehta, while respondent No. 1 herein, is the Custodian appointed under Section 3(1) of the Act. The respondent No. 2 is the Disposal Committee in all the appeals, which are filed … by the Special Court and this Court including the last judgment in 2006 (cited supra). It is firmly suggested that there was no question of … the Act to refer two questions for the opinion of Disposal Committee. They were:(i) What would be the appropriate time to be given to the bidders for submitting bids after publication of the notice inviting bids? (ii)