Advanced Search Results
Dhanjishaw Rattanji Karani Vs. Bombay Municipality
Mumbai
Sep-18-1944
Criminal
AIR1945Bom320; (1945)47BOMLR304
Bhagwati, J.1. The judgment first set out the pleadings and discussed issues of facts and proceeded : In the course of the evidence which was led on behalf of the plaintiff, Mr. Maneksha tendered the certified...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskLakshmi Kanth Shinde @ L.K. Shinde Vs. The State of Telangana represen ...
Andhra Pradesh
Dec-02-2015
Education
1. In the present writ petition, challenge is to the Memorandum No.1697/SC-A/A2/2008-4 dated 22.08.2011 issued by the first respondent State Government. By virtue of the said memorandum, the State Government permitted the Anti-Corruption Bureau to file...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskDattaram Advertising Private Ltd. and Another Vs. State of Karnataka
Karnataka
Oct-11-1990
Sales Tax
Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 11, 12(1), 12(3), 12A, 12A(1) and 23(3)
[1991]81STC394(Kar)
K.P. Kumar for M/s King and Partridge
M.P. Chandrakantharaj Urs, J. 1. There petitions are disposed of by this common order, as all of them raise the same questions of law which are required to be decided by us under section 23(3) of...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Bandulal Balaprasad Vs. the State
Mumbai
Jan-31-1962
Criminal
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections - 251A, 262(1) and 537; Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 - Sections 65, 116 and 262
AIR1962Bom258; (1962)64BOMLR354; ILR1962Bom490
A.A. Peerbhoy and ;H.A. Tambe, Advs.
Chainani, C.J.(1) This is an application in revision by the accused, who has been convicted under clauses (b) (c) and (f) of section 65 and clause (b) of section 66 of the Bombay Prohibition Act. The...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskDr. S.C. Barat and anr. Vs. Hari Vinayak Pataskar and ors.
Madhya Pradesh
Sep-08-1961
Constitution
Jabalpur University Act, 1956 - Sections 11, 11(2), 34 and 48; Constitution of India - Article 226
AIR1962MP73
R.S. Dabir, ;V.S. Dabir and ;R.P. Sinha, Advs.
Dixit, C.J.1. The petitioners in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution are members of the Jabalpur University Court. The applicant Dr. S.C. Barat is also a member of the Executive Council of the University...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskChandrakant Ratilal Mehta and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Mumbai
Apr-06-1993
Criminal
1993(3)BomCR99; 1993CriLJ2863
P.B. Sawant, Adv. for ;S.B. Pawar, ;S.R. Parekh, ;S.J. Thakkar and ;Ku. Vidya Kasle, Advs.
1. Exceptional as it may seem, this set of appeals concerns the familiar situation of an approach being made to a Minister that the law should be transgressed, the reward offered being a large sum of...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskProvince of Bombay Vs. Kusaldas S. Advani and ors.
Supreme Court of India
Sep-15-1950
Property
Government of India Act, 1935 - Sections 176 and 306; Bombay Land Requisition Ordinance, 1947 - Sections 3, 4, 10 and 12; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 176 and 177; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 80; Specific Relief Act - Sections 45
AIR1950SC222; (1951)53BOMLR1; (1950)IIMLJ703(SC); [1950]1SCR621
Kania, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court at Bombay and it relates to the power of the High Court to issue a writ of certiorari against the province of Bombay...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskBrij Kishore Verma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Allahabad
Sep-21-2012
Land Acquisition
Devi Prasad Singh, J. 1. WITH the change of Government, the creation of new districts has become a routine feature in the State of Uttar Pradesh that too, without adverting to financial viability and necessity. Ordinarily,...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskDr. Y. Manjunath and Another Vs. State of Karnataka
Karnataka
Oct-25-2016
Land Acquisition
Anand Byrareddy, J. 1. These petitions are heard and disposed of by this common order, as the petitions are filed challenging the same proceedings. 2. The facts are stated to be as follows. The petitioner in...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskEmperor Vs. Ramrao Mangesh Burde
Mumbai
Jan-29-1932
Criminal
AIR1932Bom406; (1932)34BOMLR598
Wadia, J.1. The accused in this case are charged with being parties to a conspiracy in or about October 1930 to do certain illegal acts consisting of offences under the Indian Penal Code. Accused Nos. 1...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »