Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Defendent: sarjoo prasad · Page 1 of about 262 results (0.075 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.

Apr 03 1964

Basmati Devi Vs. Chamroo Sao and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-03-1964

Subject : Property

Acts : Transfer of Property Act - Sections 76

Reported in : AIR1964SC1707; [1964]7SCR633

Das Gupta, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for redemption of a large number of usufructuary mortgages in favour of the defendants. The plaintiff who owned 1.67 acres of lands which were recorded in...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 09 1962

Mst. Kharbuja Kuer Vs. Jangbahadur Rai

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-09-1962

Subject : FamilyProperty

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 100

Reported in : AIR1963SC1203; 1962(0)BLJR892; [1963]1SCR456

Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Sarjoo Prasad

Subba Rao, J. 1. This appeal by special leave is preferred against the judgment of a single Judge of the Patna High Court. The facts that gave rise to this appeal may be briefly stated. To...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 29 1973

Qudrat Ullah Vs. Municipal Board, Bareilly

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-29-1973

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Easements Act - Sections 52; Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 - Sections 43 and 43(2); United Provinces (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 - Sections 3; Transfer of Property Act - Sections 105 and 106;

Reported in : AIR1974SC396; (1974)1SCC202; [1974]2SCR530; 1974(6)LC237(SC)

Advocate for Respondent : Sarjoo Prasad and ;C.P. Lal Advs.

Krishna Iyer, J.1. This litigation, started in 1951, has lived long, although the main point on which the fate of the case rests is the construction of a contract between the Municipal Board, Bareilly (the respondent...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Mar 16 1964

Haridas Das and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-16-1964

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 - Sections 41, ;Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 40, 193, 199, 211, 499 and 500; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 107, 109, 191, 195 and 466; Constitution of India - Articles 133(1) and 134(1); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - 1908 - Sections 24 and 95

Reported in : AIR1964SC1773; [1964]7SCR237

Sarkar, J. 1. The High Court at Calcutta made an order directing the Registrar of the Court to file a complaint in the Court of a magistrate against the appellants under Sections 211, 199 and other...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 10 1978

The Workmen Vs. the Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-10-1978

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Coking Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, 1972 - Sections 9, 9(1), 9(2), 17 and 17(1); Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Reported in : AIR1978SC979; 1978(26)BLJR225; 1978LabIC709; (1978)IILLJ17SC; (1978)2SCC175; [1978]3SCR482; 1978(10)LC329(SC)

Advocate for Respondent : Sarjoo Prasad and ; M.L.Verma, Advs.

1. The correct interpretation of Section 9 of the Coking Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, 1972, (for short, the Act), read along with Section 17 settles the fate of this appeal by special leave. We may start...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 21 2003

Sri Sarjoo Prasad and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

Decided on : Feb-21-2003

Subject : Civil

Acts : Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 - Sections 15(2)

S.N. Jha, J. 1. This review petition has been filed in the light of the order of the Supreme Court dated 26-2-1999 in SLP (Civil) CC No. 8140/98. The order runs as under.'Learned Counsel for the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 03 1969

Namdeo Kashinath Aher Vs. H.G. Vartak and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-03-1969

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 197 and 438; General Clauses Act, 1897 - Sections 3(60); Constitution of India - Articles 14, 164(1) and 164(2); Indian Panel Code, 1860 - Sections 79, 409, 477-A, 500 and 504; Government of India Act, 1935 - Sections 270(1); Bombay Police Act, 1951 - Sections 161; Madras Police Act - Sections 53

Reported in : AIR1970Bom385; (1969)71BOMLR758; 1970CriLJ1427; ILR1970Bom464

Advocate for Respondent : Rajani Patel and ;Y.S. Murudkar, Advs.

ORDER1. The short point that arises for consideration in this Reference is as to the precise scope of Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and whether In the circumstances of this case cognizance of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 30 1940

M.L.M. Mahalingam Chettiar Vs. Ramanathan Chettiar

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : May-30-1940

Subject : Civil

Reported in : (1940)42BOMLR1166

Romer, J.1. This is a consolidated appeal against the orders dated October 2, 1934, and February 1, 1935, of the High Court of Madras affirming two orders dated December 23, 1931, of the Court of the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 12 1997

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Kashinath Dagadu Sanap

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-12-1997

Subject : Limitation

Reported in : (1978)80BOMLR449; 1978MhLJ339

Deshpande, J.1. The plaintiff (respondent herein) was employed as a junior accountant in the office of the Divisional Forest Officer at Vyara in Dhulia district. In 1951, he was drawing in all Rs. 200 per month...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 11 2000

Mohd. ZahooruddIn Vs. U.P. Sarkar Sarak Parivahan Nigam, Lucknow and O ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-11-2000

Subject : Service

Acts : The U.P. Recruitment to Service, (Determination of Date of Birth) (First Amendment), Rules, 1974 and 1980

Reported in : 2001LabIC1373

Advocate for Respondent : Vina Sinha, Adv.

Bhanwar Singh, J.1. This petition has been filed for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexures-4 and 6, whereby the petitioner's date of birth was approved to be as 8.6.1935 and accordingly, he was...

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