Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Plaintiff: deoki nandan · Page 1 of about 825 results (0.270 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.

Nov 23 1999

Sri Ranganatha Swamy Prasanna Kaveri Trust (Registered) (Through Trust ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Nov-23-1999

Subject : Property

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 2(14), 92 and 115

Reported in : ILR2000KAR2556; 2000(3)KarLJ361

Advocate for Appellant : Sri L.S. Venkatakrishna, Adv.

ORDER1. Heard Sri L.S. Venkatakrishna, Counsel for the revision petitioners and Sri S.V. Shastri, learned Counsel for the respondents.This Civil Revision Petition arises from the judgment and order dated 19th September, 1997 in Miscellaneous Case No....

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 06 1964

Krishneshwari Varshney Vs. Ramesh Chandra Varshney and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-06-1964

Subject : CivilFamily

Acts : Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 3 and 19; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 35, 96 and 100 - Order 41, Rule 22

Reported in : AIR1965All228

Advocate for Appellant : Deoki nandan Agarwala, Adv.

S.C. Manchanda, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal from the order of the District Judge, Moradabad, dated 16th Oct. 1962, confirming the dismissal of her suit.2. Smt. Krishneshwari Varshney had filed the suit giving...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 22 1965

Kanhaiya Lal Bhargava and anr. Vs. Official Liquidator

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-22-1965

Subject : CompanyDirect Taxation

Acts : Companies Act, 1913 - Sections 194 and 216; Companies (Amendment) Act, 1956 - Sections 481; Income-tax Act, 1961 - Sections 2(22) and 194

Reported in : [1965]56ITR393(All)

Advocate for Appellant : Deoki Nandan, Adv.

Satish Chandra, J.1. This is a petition by two contributories of a company in liquidation. It purports to be under Section 216 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913. It prays that the official liquidator be directed...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Feb 02 1973

Deoki Nandan Vs. Baij Nath

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-02-1973

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : 1973CriLJ1636; 1973()WLN150

ORDERS. Mehta, J.1. There was a dispute in regard to a 'Nohra in the town, of Sultana, District Jhunjhunu. Party No. 1 Bilas Rai moved an application on April 5, 1972, in the Court of the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 06 1994

Raisa Begum and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-06-1994

Subject : CriminalConstitution

Acts : Prohibition of Dowry Act - Sections 3 and 4; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 168, 420, 467 and 498A; Passports Act 1963; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 41, 155(2), 156(1), 167, 167(2), 169, 170, 171, 173, 437, 437(1), 439, 484 and 561A; Constitution of India - Articles 19, 21, 32, 141, 147, 226 and 227

Reported in : 1995CriLJ1067

Advocate for Appellant : V.M. Zaidi, Adv.

ORDERK. Narayan, J. 1. Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7616 of 1993, Raisa Begam v. State of U.P., had been brought by eight persons with a prayer for issue a writ of certiorari quashing the first...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 23 1993

Natho Mal Vs. State of U.P. and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-23-1993

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Essential Commodities Act - Sections 3 and 7; Passports Act, 1963; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 41, 56A, 155(2), 156(1), 157, 169, 170, 171, 173, 432, 438, 482, 491 and 561A; Constitution of India - Articles 19, 21, 32, 141, 226 and 227; Municipal Law

Reported in : 1994CriLJ1919

Advocate for Appellant : V.K. Chaturvedi, Adv.

K. Narayan, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been brought for the relief of quashing the first information report in case crime No. 74 of 1991 under Section 3/7 of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 27 1960

Martand Pandharinath Harkare Vs. Charity Commissioner

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-27-1960

Subject : Trusts and societies

Reported in : (1961)63BOMLR274

Shah, J.1. This is an appeal by the original applicant who had filed an application claiming that the property referred to in the application was his private property and was not governed by the provisions of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 24 1975

Gur Dayal Prasad Vs. L. Raghunath Prasad and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-24-1975

Subject : Contract

Acts : Partnership Act, 1932 - Sections 11, 13 and 44; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 92

Reported in : AIR1976All141

Advocate for Appellant : Deoki Nandan Agarwal, Adv.

R.B. Misra, J.1. The present appeals are directed against the judgment and decree dated 30th October, 1958, passed by the 1st Additional Civil Judge, Agra in a suit for dissolution of partnership, rendition of accounts and...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 16 1986

Deoki Nandan Agarwal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-16-1986

Subject : Service

Acts : High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 - Sections 3, 4(1), 4(2), 5, 5(2), 5A, 6, 7, 8 and 9; All India Services (Leave) Rules, 1956 - Rule 20B; High Court Judges Rules, 1956 - Rule 2; Constitution of India - Article 226; All India Services (Leave) Rules, 1955 - Rule 20B;

Reported in : AIR1987All108

Advocate for Appellant : Deoki Nandan, Adv.

H.N. Seth, Actg. C.J. 1. By means of this petition Sri Deoki Nandan Agarwal, a retired Judge of this Court, has prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Union of India to...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 04 2005

Smt. Sudama Devi Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

Decided on : May-04-2005

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Acts : Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1994 - Sections 2, 5 and 7; Bihar Finance Act, 2002; Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 2(11), 2(14), 2(22), 2(26), 2(29), 2(33), 2(35), 2(47) and 41(4)

Advocate for Appellant : R.K.P. Singh, Manish Kishore and Bal Bhushan Choudhary, Advs.

Nagendra Rai, A.C.J.1. The question which has to be answered by this Full Bench in this case is as to whether the omnibus having seating capacity of more than five persons but below 12 is a...

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