Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Plaintiff: k kuppuswamy · Page 1 of about 28 results (0.048 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.

Jul 03 2009

Sri R. Sadagopan Vs. Sri K. Rajaiah S/O Late Sri N. Kodandarama Naidu

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jul-03-2009

Subject : Contempt of Court

Acts : Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 2, 12, 13 and 15(1); Companies Act; Extradition Act, 1962 - Sections 21; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 313; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 24 - Order 1, Rule 10 - Order 6, Rules 16 and 17 - Order 7, Rule 11; Constitution of India - Article 226; Contempt of Court Rules - Rule 11

Reported in : ILR2009KAR3302; 2009(6)KarLJ239

Advocate for Appellant : G.R. Mohan Adv.

ORDERA.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.1. This is a petition filed under Section 2(c)(iii) and 12 read with Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 ('the Act' for short), to initiate Criminal Contempt of Court proceedings...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 13 1998

New India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bommakkal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-13-1998

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Acts : Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Sections 103A; Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1988 - Sections 157

Reported in : 2000ACJ1500; [1998]94CompCas819(Mad)

Advocate for Appellant : K.S. Narasimhan, Adv.

P. Sathasivam, J.1. New India Insurance Company Limited has filed the above review application under Order 47, Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the order made in C.M.A....

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 24 2003

Gaurav Toshniwal Vs. Best and Crompton Engineering

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Decided on : Nov-24-2003

Subject : MRTP

Reported in : (2004)120CompCas451

1. The debenture-holder in M/s. Best & Crompton Engineering Limited ("the Company") has made this application under Section 117C of the Companies Act, 1956 ("the Act") submitting that the Company has failed to redeem the debentures...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Feb 17 1960

A.B. Palani Vs. K.P. Ramaswami Mudaliar and Co., by K.P. Kolandiappa M ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-17-1960

Subject : Civil

Reported in : (1960)2MLJ361

Rajamannar, C.J.1. These two appeals arise out of a petition filed by one K.P. Ramaswami Mudaliar & Co., the contesting respondent before us, to adjudicate Venkataramanjulu Chetty insolvent. The petition was filed on 27th March, 1958....

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 12 2001

Delphine Ann Mascarenhas Vs. MervyIn J.A. Menezes and anr.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Sep-12-2001

Subject : FamilyProperty

Acts : Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Sections 88, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 130 and 131; Indian Succession Act, 1865 - Sections 111

Reported in : ILR2001KAR4883; 2001(6)KarLJ81

Advocate for Appellant : Udaya Holla, Adv.

1. This is plaintiff's first appeal. In this appeal, the appellant has called in question the correctness of the judgment and decree dated 29th August, 1994 made in O.S. No. 61 of 1992 by the Court...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 03 1952

Hajee Mahomed Abdul Rahman Vs. Tajunnissa Begum and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-03-1952

Subject : Family

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 151

Reported in : AIR1953Mad420; (1952)2MLJ846

Advocate for Appellant : K. Rajah Ayyar and ;K. Kuppuswami, Advs.

1. This is an appeal'against the order of Panchapakesa Aiyar J. directing the appellant to pay to respondent 1 a sum of Rs. 500 by way of interim maintenance pending the disposal of a suit on...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 16 1951

Bysani Kamalamma Vs. Syed Ismail Ispahani E. Venkata Sastri

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-16-1951

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 37, Rule 4; Madras High Court Original Side Rules - Order 1, Rule 3 - Order 7, Rule 4

Reported in : AIR1951Mad895; (1951)IMLJ676

Advocate for Appellant : K. Kuppuswami, Adv.

Rajamannar, C.J.1. The only question which arises in this appeal is whether Order 37, Rule 4, Civil P. C. (hereinafter referred to as the Code) applies to the original side of this Ct. The resp. filed...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 25 2010

Sakunthala and Vs. Viramani,

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-25-2010

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Advocate for Appellant : K. Kuppuswamy, Adv.

C.S. Karnan, J.1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellants/petitioners against the Award and Decree, dated 03.01.2005, made in M.C.O.P. No. 1182 of 2002, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 04 2001

Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S Tamilnadu Asbestos (Pipes)

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Decided on : Sep-04-2001

Subject : Service Tax

1. This is a departmental appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Trichy, against M/s Tamilnadu Asbestos (Pipes) the respondents herein on the ground that the Commissioner (Appeals), Trichy has allowed the appeal of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 23 2006

H.M. Mohan Kumar and ors. Vs. Karnataka Slum Clearance Board and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jan-23-2006

Subject : Civil

Acts : Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1973 - Sections 37(3), 38 and 71; Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961; Karnataka Slum Clearance Board Services (Cadre and Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules, 1999 - Rules 4, 4E and 6; Draft Rules, 1997; Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1958 - Rule 419; Karnataka Civil Services (Service and Kannada Language) Examinations Rules, 1974 - Rule 2(3) and Rule 2(6); Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16, 226 and 227

Reported in : 2006(2)KarLJ90

Advocate for Appellant : P.S. Rajagopal, Adv.

ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. Four employees of the Karnataka Slum Clearance Board (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board'), who are presently working as Assistant Executive Engineers are before this Court challenging the order dated 29-9-2004 issued by...

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