Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Plaintiff: hari shankar and · Page 1 of about 2,425 results (0.211 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.

Dec 20 2002

Sandeep Prakash Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-20-2002

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 169, 173, 173(2) and 482; Constitution of India - Article 21

Reported in : 2003BomCR(Cri)1171; 2003(2)MhLj818

Advocate for Appellant : C. Hari Shankar, Adv.

J.G. Chitre, J.1. This application is heard finally today as requested by counsel of both parties. This criminal application has exposed a very strange phenomena of the life and a page in the life of a...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 18 2007

Ambica Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-18-2007

Subject : CivilExcise

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 33, 35C, 35G, 35G(1), 35G(9), 35H, 36B, 66, 66(1), 66(2), 66(8) and 274(2); Finance Act, 2003 - Sections 144 and 145; Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 256(2); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) ; Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 33, 66 and 66(1); Customs Act; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 1A, 2(11), 10A and 10F; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 20, 100, 100(1), 141 - Order 2, Rule 2 - Order 23, Rule 1

Reported in : 2007(213)ELT323(SC); JT2007(8)SC467; 2007(8)SCALE488; (2007)6SCC769; [2007]9STT1; (2009)20VST1(SC)

Advocate for Appellant : C. Hari Shankar,; Jagdish N.,; S. Sunil,;

S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue which arises for our consideration in these appeals relates to determination of situs of the High Court in which appeals would lie under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excise...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 09 1998

Munni Devi and ors. Vs. Anguri Devi

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-09-1998

Subject : Family

Acts : Succession Act, 1925 - Sections 372; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 114

Reported in : AIR1999MP31; 1998(2)MPLJ648

Advocate for Appellant : S.S. Bansal, Adv.

ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved by an order under Section 383 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), on the application filed by the contesting respondent, the mother of the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Nov 22 2002

Shri B.L. Dhaluka, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-22-2002

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 112, 113, 114, 129E and 140; ;Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 35F

Reported in : 2003(154)ELT59(Del)

Advocate for Appellant : C. Hari Shankar, Adv

D.K. Jain, J.1. Rule D.B.2. Since a short point of law is involved, with the consent of counsel for the parties, we proceed to dispose of all these matters finally at this stage itself.3. The issue...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 05 2007

Y. Bhaskara Raju Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-05-2007

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 7, 8D(1), 11(6), 11(8), 23(1), 23(3) and 24; Indian Contract Act - Sections 74; Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 20; Limitation Act, 1963 - Schedule - Article 137; Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 67; Sale of Goods Act; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 2, Rule 2; Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : 2008(1)ALD612; 2008(3)ALT370

Advocate for Appellant : N. Vidya Prasad, Adv.

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. These writ petitions are coming up for admission. Sri Rajiv Reddy, learned Counsel, who had accepted notice on behalf of the respondents, had raised a preliminary objection relating to the maintainability of the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 01 1924

Ram Nath Vs. Emperor

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-01-1924

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : AIR1925All230; 83Ind.Cas.654; 84Ind.Cas.714

Mukerji, J.1. The applicant, Babu Ram Nath, who is a practising Mukhtar at Agra was convicted by a First Class Magistrate of Agra of the offences under Sections 419 and 465 of the Indian Penal Code,...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 12 1996

Hari Shankar Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-12-1996

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : 1996CriLJ1839

Advocate for Appellant : Hirdyajot Singh, Adv

1. The appellant Shri Hari Shankar, feeling aggrieved by his conviction under the Contempt of Courts Act by Shri Rajesh Aggarwal, a learned Civil Judge has filed this Criminal Appeal. 2. The appellant has read out...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 11 2011

Mukesh Kumar Vs. Smt. Kamlesh Devi and ors

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-11-2011

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Motor Vehicles Act - Sections 166, 140, 3; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 279, 304-A; Representation of the People Act, 1951

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Hari Shankar, Adv.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 27th May, 2009 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Delhi. 2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the appeal are as follows....

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 01 1985

Atma Steels (P) Ltd. Vs. Harbir Singh

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-01-1985

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 - Sections 21

Reported in : 29(1986)DLT456; 1986(10)DRJ216; 1986RLR73

Advocate for Appellant : Hari Shankar and ; K.L. Sethi, Advs

J.D. Jain, J.(1) The controversy in this second appeal against order dated 8th August 1984 of the Rent Control Tribunal lies in a narrow compass ; the crucial question which falls for consideration bearing whether an...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 07 2006

Naresh Ahlawat Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-07-2006

Subject : Service

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 302 and 376; Madhya Pradesh Cooperative Central Bank Employees Rules, 1977 - Rule 49

Reported in : 131(2006)DLT46; 2007(2)SLJ250(Delhi)

Advocate for Appellant : C. Hari Shankar,; P. Mohapatra,; Harpreet Singh and ;

T.S. Thakur, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal arises out of an order passed by a learned single Judge of this Court whereby a writ petition filed by the appellant herein challenging an order granting only 50%...

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