Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Defendent: chandel · Page 1 of about 530 results (0.130 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.

Mar 25 2006

Kirtiwas and Etc. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Mar-25-2006

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 363, 366, 376, 376(2), 342 and 506B

Reported in : 2006CriLJ2829

Advocate for Respondent : U.K.S. Chandel, P.L.

Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.1. In Sessions case No. 458/2000 Shri C. B. Bajipai, learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bastar place Jagdalpur vide judgment dated 13-10-2001 convicted the appellants Vijay and Bhuvneshwar under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g)...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 13 1999

Rajendra Singh Vs. Chancellor, Kashi Vidyapith, Varanasi and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-13-1999

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; N.S.A. - Sections 3 (2); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 2, Rule 2; High Court Rules, 1952 - Rule 7

Reported in : 1999(4)AWC3531

Advocate for Respondent : Ajeet Kumar Singh, ;Anil Kumar Tiwari and ;B.R. Tripathi, Advs.

ORDERBinod Kumar Roy and Lakshmi Bihari, JJ. 1. In this writ petition, in which there are 28 respondents, still pending for its admission till today,following prayers have been made by the petitioner :(a) Issue a writ,...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 09 2006

Kartik Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Mar-09-2006

Subject : Narcotics

Acts : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 20, 50 and 55

Reported in : 2006CriLJ2293

Advocate for Respondent : U.K.S. Chandel, Adv.

Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 13-2-2004 delivered in Special Case No. 46/2003 by Shri R. S. Sharma, learned Sessions Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, Bastar, Headquarter at Jagdalpur whereby the appellant...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Sep 01 1994

Ravinder Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-01-1994

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : AIR1996HP79

Advocate for Respondent : M.S. Chandel,; R.L. Sood and; Vinay Kuthiala, Advs.

Kamlesh Sharma, J. 1. In this writ petition, the Letter of Intent issued in favour of the third respondent, Smt. Kamla Rani, granting her dealership for a dealer owned Petrol and H.S.D. Retail Outlet at Ner...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 09 2006

Tiharu and anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Mar-09-2006

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 376(2)

Reported in : 2006CriLJ2358

Advocate for Respondent : U.K.S. Chandel, Adv.

Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 10-5-2002, delivered by Shri Yogesh Mathur, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District Bilaspur in Session Case No. 356 of 2001, where by the appellants...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 09 2005

Kalyan Singh and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-09-2005

Subject : Civil

Acts : Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 - Sections 4, 8(1), 8(2), 8(3) and 24B; ;Himachal Pradesh Village Common Land (Vesting and Utilization) Act, 1974; ;Himachal Pradesh Village Common Land (Vesting and Utilization) (Amendment) Act, 2001; ;Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act - Sections 31(2), 36, 37, 42, 42(2) and 43; ;Constitution of India - Article 19; ;Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 - Rules 24A, 24A(6), 24B, 31 and 72

Reported in : 2006(1)ShimLC41

Advocate for Respondent : M.S. Chandel, Adv. General,; Abhilasha Kumari, Addl. Adv. Geeneral and;

K.C. Sood, J.1. The question which calls for our answer, in this writ petition, is whether a lease granted by the Government for the extraction of mineral, lime stone in this case, from the Government land,...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 07 2003

Pyar Chand Vs. Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-07-2003

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Reported in : 2003ACJ1249

Advocate for Respondent : M.S. Chandel and; Rakesh Jaswal, Advs.

Arun Kumar Goel, J. 1. Both these appeals are filed against the award passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shimla in M.A.C. Case No. 43-S/2 of 1994 dated 23.2.1996. We propose to dispose of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 29 1996

Twarku Vs. Surti

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-29-1996

Subject : PropertyCivil

Acts : Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 17, 32(5) and 114

Reported in : AIR1997HP76

Advocate for Respondent : T.R. Chandel, Adv.

1. In this Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 CPC appellant-defendant. Twarku, has assailed decree and judgment dated 10-10-1995 passed by Distriet Judge. Shimla, whereby his appeal was dismissed and decree and judgment dated 30-4-1992. of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 13 1992

Bidhi Singh Vs. M.S. Mandyal and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-13-1992

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 504; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Section 197 and 197(1)

Reported in : 1993CriLJ499

Advocate for Respondent : M.S. Chandel, Adv.

V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Respondent Shri M. S. Mandyal (at present posted as Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shimla) was posted as Sub-Divisional Judi-cial Magistrate, Palampur in the month of July, 1981. On July 7, 1981 head...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 25 2005

P.D. Attri and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-25-2005

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 226, 229 and 231; ;Himachal Pradesh High Court Officers and Servants (Salaries, Leave, Allowances and Pension) Rules, 1971; ;Punjab and Haryana High Court Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1973

Reported in : 2006(1)ShimLC190

Advocate for Respondent : M.S. Chandel, Adv. General and; D.S. Nainta, Deputy Adv. General, for Respondent No. 1 and;

K.C. Sood, J.1. The question raised in this petition is whether the recommendations of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this High Court have been considered by the Respondent-State Government objectively after exchange of views and thoughts...

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