Advanced Search Results

Milkfood Limited Vs. Union Bank of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Companies Act, 1956; Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 15, 18 and 63 - Schedule - Articles 55 and 113; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 63 and 114; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 10 and 20 - Order 29, Rule 1 - Order 37 ; ;Companies Preservation and Disposal of Records Rules, 1966

Reported in : 2007(2)CTLJ362(Del)

Advocate for Appellant : T.K. Ganju, Sr. Adv. and; Kamal Budhiraja, Adv

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The plaintiff, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, filed the present suit under Order xxxvII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said code') for...

Surjit Singh and Others Vs. Balbir Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 195(1) and 202; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 340, 420, 467, 468, 471, 475 and 476

Reported in : 1996IIIAD(SC)217; AIR1996SC1592; 1996(1)ALD(Cri)879; 1996CriLJ2304; JT1996(3)SC363; 1996(2)SCALE865; (1996)3SCC533; [1996]3SCR70

Advocate for Appellant : S. Markandeya and; R.S. Suri, Advs

1. Question of law referred to this Bench is : whether the criminal Court is debarred from proceeding with the private complaint laid against the appellants on June 13, 1983 for offences punishable under Section 468...

Rajendra Kumar and Others Vs. Gopal Krishna and Others

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 - Sections 11(1) and 21(1); Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : AIR1995All82

Advocate for Appellant : K.M. Dyal and ;Atul Dayal, Advs.

ORDER1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 10th Sept. 1992passed by the Prescribed Authority, Muzaffarnagar, releasing the disputed shop in favour of the landlord-respondents in the proceedings under Section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Urban...

M/S. Asian Paints Ltd. Vs. Cce, Chennai

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai

Subject : Service Tax

Advocate for Appellant : Shri Gopal Krishna Mundhra, Manager (Excise) for the Appellants Smt. Indira Sisupal, JDR for the Respondent.

Heard both sides. Shri Gopal Krishna Mundhra, Manager (Excise) of the appellant-company states that the appellant’s main unit in Mumbai has distributed the service tax credit to the Cuddalore Unit which has been disallowed by the...

Surajdeo Singh @ Surya Nath Singh Vs. State of Bihar

Court : Patna

Subject : Criminal

M.L. Visa, J.1. The sole appellant of this appeal is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 20.7.1987 passed by 4th Additional Sessions Judge. Bhagalpur in Sessions Case No. 241 of 1981/4 of 1986 convicting him...

Raimohan Nath Vs. the General Manager, N.E.F. Rly. and anr.

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 311(2); Railway Service (Safe guarding of National Security) Rules, 1949; Indian Railway Establishment Code - Rule 148

Advocate for Appellant : S.K. Ghose and R.C. Chaudhuri, Advs.

Sarjoo Prosad, C.J. 1. The petitioner has applied for an appropriate writ for quashing an order, dated 4-7-58, passed by the Respondent, the General Manager, North East Frontier Railway, terminating his service (under Rule 148 of...

Bhailalbhai Tulsidas Patel Vs. Shankerbhai Kilabhai Patel and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : TenancyLimitation

Acts : Tenancy Law; Bombay Tenancy Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Sections 14, 14(1), 27(1) and 29(2); Constitution of India - Article 227

Reported in : AIR1959Bom16; (1957)59BOMLR1081; ILR1958Bom273

Advocate for Appellant : D.V. Patel, Adv.

Dixit, J. 1. The applicant is the owner of five lands situate in a village, called Sarsa in the Anand Taluka of the Kaira District. Opponent No. 1 to the petition was a tenant of these...

Chimanabai Rama Naik and ors. Vs. Ganpat Jagannath Naik and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Tenancy Law; Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Sections 14, 27 and 29(2)

Reported in : AIR1959Bom425; (1958)60BOMLR975; ILR1958Bom917

Advocate for Appellant : R.A. Jahngirdar and ;V.B. Rege, Advs.

Chagla, C.J.1. A very short question as to limitation arises for our determination in this Full Ben h, and the question depends upon the proper construction to be given to Section 29(2) of the Bombay Tenancy...

Bhausaheb Tavnappa Mahajan and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Civil

Acts : Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1964 - Sections 3(1) and 4; Maharshatra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963; Evidence Act, 1972 - Sections 114; Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Rules, 1967 - Rule 3; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 11; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : AIR1982Bom284; (1981)83BOMLR586; 1982MhLJ229

Advocate for Appellant : A.M. Setalvad and;G.R. Rege, Advs.

1. The appellants are members of an unregistered association known as the Kolhapur Grain merchants Association, and had filed the suit, out of which this second Appeal arises in a representative capacity under R.8 of O.1...

Doulatram Lekhraj Rupchandani Vs. the General Manager

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service

Reported in : (1957)59BOMLR1210

Tendolkar, J. 1. This is a petition by a servant of the Western Railway complaining against an order dated July 30, 1956, terminating his services under Rule 148 of the Indian Railway Establishment Code by giving...