Advanced Search Results

Jagdish Chand Vs. Parveen Kumar and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Subject : Property

Reported in : 2008(1)ShimLC298

wrongly applied the principle of estoppel under Section 116 of the Evidence Act against the appellant/defendant instead of Section 108(e) of Transfer of Property Act?5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone

Reliance Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai Vs. the Maharahtra Electricity ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

Subject : MRTP

sent a Government Memorandum dated 25.6.2009 to the State Commission giving the direction under Section 108 of the Act, 2003 to investigate into the affairs of the Appellant and to take emergent steps for protecting the consumers interest

In the Matter Of: Tamil Nadu Electricity Consumersand#8217; Associatio ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Subject : Land Acquisition

Central Government at the time of formulation of National Electricity Policy (NEP) under Section 3 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and finalized in consultation with State Governments. The NEP stipulates that “For ensuring financial viability and sustainability, State … seen from the latest order issued by the APERC that the AP Government gave direction to APERC under section 108 to maintain uniform tariff across the state and also considered subsidy to the extent of Rs.3652.81 Crores before

V. Ramesh Kumar and ors. Vs. Shanthini Jayakrishnan and ors.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : (2008)141CompCas915

the future affairs of the Company, the following order is passed: (i) all the transfers effected after June, 2003 in respect of shares of the Company, impugned in the company petition, being violative of the articles of … from the respondents 9 to 29 in violation of the relevant articles of association of the Company and Section 108 of the Act; and (g) abuse of fiduciary position by the first respondent by illegal transfer of shares

Shri Subramanya Sharma and ors. Vs. the Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Subject : Customs

Reported in : (2006)(106)ECC215

of customs evasion. Revenue proceeded against the concerned persons by issue of show cause notice dated 21st March 2003. The adjudicating authority after following the principles of natural justice passed the impugned order. In the said order, … computer parts by M/s Sun Tech., Bangalore.4. Based on the statements of the following six persons given under Section 108 of the Customs Act, the adjudicating authority has come to the conclusion that Shri Ramesh Solanki is the

Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Others Vs. Union ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

Bhavan, C-Block, Shivalik, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi - 110 017 Sub: Directions under Section 108 of the Electricity Act, 2003 regarding disruption in electricity supply to consumers and compensation payable in respect thereof. Sir, Considering the very large

Dy. Commissioner Vs. Ramesh Kumari and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Property

Acts : East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 - Sections 14, 19, 20, 21, 21(1), 21(2), 21(3), 23, 30, 36 and 42; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 379, 427 and 447; Constitution of India - Article 226; Delhi Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1959 - Rules 3(2), 4(2) and 6

Reported in : 156(2009)DLT133

of 1997 by the DC was disposed of by the FC by the impugned order dated 27th June 2003. The FC came to the conclusion that with the disposal of the earlier revision petition by the FC … action was taken thereon by the police, she filed Writ Petition No. 108 of 1998 in this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to … 1986 a notification was issued under Section 14 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 ('Holdings Act') by the competent authority commencing the process of consolidation of land in the Village Kapashera

M/s.Progen Renewables Ltd Vs The Power Grid corporation

Court : Chennai

against the 6 th respondent’s Load Flow Study dated 27.11.2025 and without following the provisions of the Electricity act, 2003 and the Indian Telegraphic Act, 1885.For Petitioner : Mr.V.C.Janarthanan for Mr.R.S.Pandiyaraj For Respondents : Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan, ASGI 1 to … Tamil Nadu with 278 towers proposed, As on date, the foundation for 108 out of 278 Towers has been completed and out of this, 78 … to remove the solar panels which is arbitrary and without the authority.8. The petitioner would submit that under Section 16 of theIndian Telegraph Act, 1885 as and when a landowner raises objections, the District Collector is required

M/S Delhi Cold Storage Private Limited & Ors. vs State (Nct of Del ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

(Special Acts), Delhi whereby the framing of Notice under Section 251 of Cr.P.C. was directed, and Notice under Section 108 punishable under Section 629A of the Companies Act, 1956, was framed.2. In 2004, Registrar of Companies („ROC‟) filed

Hindustan Development Corporation Vs. Modiluft Limited and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 10F, 108(1D), 111A, 391(1), 393, 457 and 638; ;Companies (Central Government) General Rules - Rule 5A(4); ;Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 76 and 176

Reported in : 2005(4)CHN14,[2007]139CompCas122(Cal),2006(1)CTLJ356(Cal)

the respondents our attention was also drawn to the fact, that during pendency of this appeal, on April, 2003 an application was filed by the respondent No. 1 under Sections 391(1) and 393 of Companies Act, wherein … at the time when the shares were pledged. Those original transfer deeds were subsequently revalidated in accordance with Section 108(1D) of Companies Act, 1956 read with Rule 5A(4) of the Companies (Central Govt.) General Rules and Forms.35. For