Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Defendent: a mathur · Page 1 of about 11,005 results (0.654 seconds)

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Dec 08 1980

Mangilal and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-08-1980

Subject : Constitution

Reported in : 1981WLN622

Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Mathur

Lodha, J.1. These six writ petitions have been filed by the Railway empolyees. Since common questions of law have been raised in the writ petition's and argued, all these cases are being decided by one judgment,...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 28 1997

Lalji Kushwaha Vs. Superintending Engineer and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-28-1997

Subject : Service

Reported in : (1998)1UPLBEC216

Advocate for Respondent : S.C. and ;K.B. Mathur, Advs.

O.P. Garg, J.1. These are two writ petitions in which common questions of law and facts have been raised. They are, therefore, proposed to be decided by this common judgment. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 07 1990

Susan Leigh Beer Vs. India Tourism Development Corporation Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-07-1990

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 26; Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and Fees) Act, 1948; Foreign Tribunals Evidence Act, 1956 - Sections 1

Reported in : 40(1990)DLT545; 1990RLR366

Advocate for Respondent : Mr. O.C. Mathur

D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) By this interlocutory application the plaintiff seeks certain directions further to this court's order dated 31st January, 1989 by which a letter of request was directed to be sent to the Chief Justice...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

May 20 2002

Dr. L.R. Nath and ors. Vs. Delhi University and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-20-2002

Subject : Constitution

Reported in : AIR2002Delhi393

Advocate for Respondent : A. Mariaputtam and ; Anurag Mathur, Advs.

Manmohan Sarin, J. 1. Question arising for consideration in this writ petition is the validity of a decision taken by the University of Delhi to discontinue the via voce course i.e.D.M./M.Ch.This writ petition has been filed...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 10 2002

S.L. Batta Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through Secretary, Ministry of Fi ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-10-2002

Subject : Service

Reported in : 102(2003)DLT635; 2003(67)DRJ294; 2003(1)SLJ199(Delhi)

Advocate for Respondent : A.K. Bhardwaj, Adv. for UOI and ; R.S. Mathur, Adv. for respondents 2 and 3

Vijender Jain, J.1. Rule.2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, for issuance of direction to respondents 2 & 3 to transfer 171 privilege leaves and 234 sick leaves earned by the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 09 1993

Punjab National Bank Vs. Ganga NaraIn Kapur

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-09-1993

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 - Sections 25; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 115; Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 - Sections 2, 2-A(2), 20, 20(1) and (2); Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 53A, 105, 106 and 107; Registration Act - Sections 49; Evidence Act

Reported in : AIR1994All221

Advocate for Respondent : Sri P.N. Mathur, Adv.

ORDER1. This is defendant's revision application under S. 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act from the judgment and decree dated 23-11-1992 passed by III Addl. District Judge, Lucknow, decreeing the plaintiff-respondent's claim for decree...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 15 1978

Thakurlal Shivprakash Poddar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-15-1978

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 24 and 24(1); Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 43(5)

Reported in : [1979]116ITR190(MP)

Advocate for Respondent : A.M. Mathur, Adv.

Kondaiah, J.1. At the instance of the applicant-assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, has submitted a statementof case under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court on the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 11 2009

Eskay Electronics (i) Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. P.K. Khera, Superintenden ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-11-2009

Subject : CriminalExcise

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 9, 9A and 32K(1); Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - Sections 56; Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 - Sections 5(2); Criminal Procedure , 1973 - Sections 244 and 482; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 109, 120B, 161, 192, 193 and 120; Constitution of India - Article 21

Reported in : 2009(244)ELT519(Del)

Advocate for Respondent : Satish Aggarwal, Adv. in Crl. M.C. 1832/2008, ; Dinesh Mathur, Sr. Adv. and ;

Rajiv Shakdher, J.1. The captioned petitions, which are filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to in short the Cr.P.C.), can be disposed of by a common judgment in view...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 14 1980

Suresh Kumar Bagaria Vs. University of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-14-1980

Subject : Constitution

Acts : University of Rajasthan Ordinances - Order 152, 152(1) and 152(2); Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : AIR1981Raj188

Advocate for Respondent : C.M. Mathur, Adv.

ORDERG.M. Lodha, J.1. Suresh Chand Bagariva petitioner, passed his Secondary examination in the First Division in the year 1977. In the Higher Secondary examination, he got Second Division obtaining 57.25% marks in the year 1978.2. According...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 14 1995

State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Mahamantri, P.W.D. and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-14-1995

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Minimum Wages Act - Sections 20 and 21

Reported in : (1996)IIILLJ1174Raj; 1996(1)WLC177; 1995(1)WLN244

Advocate for Respondent : Sanjay Mathur and; Govind Mathur, Advs. for Respondent No. 1

Arun Madan, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the panics. This writ petition, under Articles 226 & 221 of the Constitution of India, has been preferred by the petitioners against the impugned Auard passed In the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial