Advanced Search Results

S.N. Sundalaimuthu Chettiar Vs. Palaniyandavan

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 115; Madras Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955 - Sections 2 and 3(3); Madras Cultivating Tenants Protection (Amendment) Act, 1956

Reported in : AIR1966SC469; [1966]1SCR450

Advocate for Respondent : Mr. S. C. Agarwal

Mudholkar, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order passed by the High Court of Madras dismissing a petition for revision under s. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the revision application the...

State of Rajasthan Vs. L.N. Vyas

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Service

Acts : Rajasthan Accounts Services Rules, 1958 - Rule 9

Reported in : RLW2004(4)Raj2272; 2004(2)WLC562

Advocate for Respondent : M.R. Singhvi, Adv.

N.N. Mathur, J.1. The instant State appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 15.12.99 whereby allowed the writ petition of the respondent herein and directed the appellant to grant him refixation...

Madhu Limaye Vs. Sub-divisional Magistrate, Monghyr and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Media and CommunicationCriminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 188; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) (Cr. PC), 1973 - Sections 55, 91, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 112 to 119, 120 to 126A, 134 and 144

Reported in : AIR1971SC2486; 1971CriLJ1720; (1970)3SCC746; [1971]2SCR711

Advocate for Respondent : Nur-ud-din Ahmed, ; K.P. Verma, ; D. Goburdhun, ;

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petitions Nos. 77 and 307 of 1970.Petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India. W.P. No. 77 of 1970.Madhu Limaye,appeared in person.Nur-ud-din Ahmed, K. P. Varma and D. Goburdhun, for the respondents...

Sugen Inc.and Another Vs. Controller General of Patents, Design, Trade ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Intellectual Property

(Order No.79/2013) Mrs. Prabha Sridevan, Chairman In the post grant opposition to Patent No.209251 which related to a compound which modulates the activity of protein kinases, the Assistant Controller was pleased to revoke the patent. The...

Man Industrial Corporation Vs. Superintendent, Central Excise, Mor and ...

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Excise

Reported in : 1991(34)LC572(Rajasthan)

S.C. Agarwal, J.1. Man Industrial Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner Company') is engaged in manufacture of bars, rods, sections, squares, forgings, etc. and for that purpose it uses sled ingots produced with the...

Ramadhar Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Education

Reported in : 2012CrLJ117(NOC)

S.C. Agarwal,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State. This is a complainant's revision against the order dated 28.6.2011passed by Addl. District Judge-I, Auraiya in S.T. No. 1 of 2007 (State...

Dr Sukhdeo Singh and Anr Vs. Human Resources Department

Court : Jharkhand

Subject : Land Acquisition

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 813 of 2015 ­­­­­­­ 1. Dr. Sukhdeo Singh, Son of Shri Baikunth Singh, resident of Village­Dharampur, PO Nawagarh Chatti, via Markacho, PS Dhanwar, Dist. Giridih...

Ram Pukar Sharma and Anr Vs. Human Resources Department

Court : Jharkhand

Subject : Land Acquisition

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 750 of 2015 ­­­­­­­ 1. Ram Pukar Sharma, son of Late Karan Singh, resident of Saria, PO & PS Saria, Dist. Giridih 2. Dr. Siddeshwar...

Makbul Rasul Alias Babalal Vs. Dastagir Dada Jamdar

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Sections 4 and 4(1)

Reported in : 2003(1)ALLMR193; 2003(2)BomCR595; 2003(1)MhLj353

Advocate for Respondent : S.V. Sadavarte, Adv.

S.A. Bobde, J. 1. This petition is directed against the judgment and order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dated 29th November 1990 holding that the petitioner is not tenant of the respondent but was supervising the...

il and Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Vs. Birla Perucchini Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 255; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 11

Reported in : 2003(3)BomCR334; [2004]121CompCas335(Bom); (2003)4CompLJ131(Bom); [2003]47SCL426(Bom)

Advocate for Respondent : Virendra V. Tulzapurkar, ;Kirti Munshi, ;Someshwar Sundaresan, ;Udwadia, ;Udeshi and ;Berjis, Advs.

1. Admit. Respondents waive service. By consent taken up for hearing and final disposal forthwith.2. In these proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the following reliefs have been prayed for and...