Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Defendent: v r padhye · Page 1 of about 5 results (0.046 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.

Aug 13 1976

Vithalrao Udhaorao Uttarwar and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-13-1976

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 13(2), 14, 15, 15(3), 16, 17, 19, 19(1), 21, 22, 25, 25(1), (2), (2A), (2B), (3), (4), (5) and (6),29(1), 31, 31(2), 31-A, 31-B, 31-C, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 39, 50, 53(1), 53(2), 132, 133, 226, 277, 245, 246, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 301, 352, 354, 355, 357, 358, 359(1), 359(1-A), 360, 367, 368 and 394; Constitution (Fortieth Amendment) Act; Constitution (Twenty-Ninth Amendment) Act, 1972; Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951; Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Lowering of Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 - Sections 2, 2-A, 2(5), 22(5), 2(9), 2(21), 2(30), 3, 3(1), 3(2), 3(14), 4, 4(1), 4(2), 5, 5(1), 8, 9, 10, 10(1), 4(1), 11, 12, 12(2), 13, 13(2), 13(3), 14, 15, 16, 16(3), 17, 17(1), 18, 21, 21-A(1), 21(4), 23, 27, 28

Reported in : AIR1977Bom99

Advocate for Respondent : R.W. Adik, Adv. General, M.M. Qazi and Naik, A.G.P.

Masodkar, J. 1. These 2661 cases have clogged the Court's corridors for considerable time, challenging the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (Act No. 27 of 1961) as amended by the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 12 1973

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Radheshyam Motilal Khandelwal and ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-12-1973

Subject : Insurance

Acts : Insurance Act, 1938 - Sections 2(6-B) and 3(2); Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 28

Reported in : AIR1974Bom228; 1974MhLJ319

Advocate for Respondent : V.R. Padhye and ;R.M. Joharapurkar, Advs.

Chandurkar, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendant, the New India Assurance Company Limited, Bombay, challenging a decree for Rs. 16,494.80 passed against them in favour of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs claimed to be...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 25 1970

Official Liquidator, Nagpur Glass Works Ltd. Vs. (In Liquidation) V.D. ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-25-1970

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 48, 115, 235, 477, 477(5), 477(6), 478, 488, 534 and 543

Reported in : (1971)73BOMLR333; [1971]41CompCas524(Bom); 1970MhLJ686

Advocate for Respondent : C.P. Kalele, ;Y.S. Athale, ;B.A. Wazalwar, ;Shanker Anand, ;V.H. Chati, ;V.R. Padhye and ;A.S. Bobde, Advs.

Nain, J.1. These are two applications for the renovation of the ex parte order dated 27th August 1969, for the examination of the directors of the Nagpur Glass Works Ltd. - a company under winding-up under...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Mar 23 1983

Ranchoddas and anr. Vs. Gupta Brass Stores and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-23-1983

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 12 and 12(2); ;Central Provinces and Bearer Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949

Reported in : AIR1983Bom455; 1983MhLJ933

Advocate for Respondent : V.R. Padhye, Adv.

ORDER1. The point that falls for determination in the present petition is whether provisions of S. 12(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 ('the Act of 1963' for short) apply to the application for review by the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 04 1988

Harshadbhai Shah and anr. Vs. Rani Kamla Raje Wd/O Kunwar Jaisinghrao ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-04-1988

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 23, Rule 3

Reported in : 1988(3)BomCR166; 1988MhLJ874

Advocate for Respondent : V.R. Padhye, Adv. for respondent No. 1, ; A. Bade, Adv. for respondent No. 3 in FA 195, for No. 2 in FA 196/83, ; K.R. Gohokar, Adv. for respondent No. 1 in A.F 195 and for No. 10 in FA 196/83

M.M. Qazi, J.1. The impugned Order has been passed by the Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nagpur, on the basis of the compromise petition on 11-3-1983. There is no dispute that the compromise petition was not...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

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

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial