Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Plaintiff: manoj d taneja · Page 1 of about 4 results (0.032 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.

Jan 18 2000

Badshah Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jan-18-2000

Subject : CriminalNarcotics

Acts : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 50

Reported in : 2000IIIAD(Delhi)668; 2000CriLJ2119; 84(2000)DLT652; 2000(53)DRJ487; 2000(69)ECC615

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Manoj D. Taneja, amices Curia

ORDERDalveer Bhandari, J. 1. This appeal has been on board for a long time. No one is appearing for the appellant. thereforee, in the interest of justice, Mr. Manoj D. Taneja, Advocate, is appointed amices Curiae...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 05 1992

Dinesh Bhardwaj Vs. Uoi and Others

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-05-1992

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : 1993CriLJ2624

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Tirlok Kumar and; Mr. Manoj D. Taneja, Advs

ORDER1. The detention order was passed against the petitioner, Dinesh Bhardwaj dated 19th February, 1992 under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter called as the 'COFEPOSA...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 25 1992

Bharat Alias Bharat Singh Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-25-1992

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : 1993CriLJ1156; 1992(3)Crimes687; 49(1993)DLT521; 1992(24)DRJ277

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Trilok Kumar and; Mr. Manoj D. Taneja, Advs

Mohd. Shamim, J.1. The petitioner through the present petition wants to challenge an order of detention made against him by the Union of India vide Notification No. 673/394/91-Cus. VIII dated September 25, 1991 passed by Shri...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Apr 30 2007

Aruna V. Kumar and anr. Vs. State and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-30-2007

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Delhi Development Act, 1957 - Sections 29 and 29(2)

Reported in : 2007(96)DRJ332

Advocate for Appellant : Manoj D. Taneja, Adv

S. Ravindra Bhat, J.COM. CASE. 263/2003Under Section 29(2) DDA ACT1. The petitioner claims a quashing order in respect of a complaint filed by the Delhi Development Authority alleging commission of offence under Section 29 of the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial