Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Plaintiff: rajendra tiwari · Page 1 of about 206 results (0.107 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.

Feb 01 2002

Radhelal Gupta Vs. State Bar Council of M.P. and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-01-2002

Subject : CivilConstitution

Acts : Advocates Act, 1961 - Sections 3, 5, 8 and 8A; Madhya Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 - Sections 74 and 85

Reported in : AIR2002MP98; 2002(2)MPHT10

Advocate for Appellant : N.C. Jain and ;P.S. Nair, Sr. Advs.

ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. The pivotal issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition preferred by a learned member of the Bar whether the members of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh are entitled...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jun 19 1990

Dr. (Ku.) Arifa Almas Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-19-1990

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Madhya Pradesh Selection for Post-Graduation Courses (Clinical, Para Clinical and Non-Clinical Courses) in Medical College of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 1984 - Rules 1, 8.1, 8.3 and 8.4; Constitution of India - Article 162; Madhya Pradesh Vishwa Vidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973 - Sections 38

Reported in : AIR1991MP29; 1991(0)MPLJ189

Advocate for Appellant : J.P. Sanghi, Adv.

Faizan Uddin, J.1. The order passed in this petition will also govern the disposal of Misc. Petition No. 4037 of 1989 (Dr. (Smt.) Namrata Seth v. State of M. P. and others); Misc. Petition No. 5256...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 25 1999

Rama Shankar Mishra and anr. Vs. Kuladhipati, A.P.S. University and or ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-25-1999

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Madhya Pradesh Viswavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973 - Sections 4, 12(1), 13, 13(2), 13(6), 13(7), 14, 20 to 25, 40, 47, 48, 52, 52(1), 52(3), 52(4), 52(5), 54, 67 and 68; Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 361

Reported in : 2000(1)MPHT533

Advocate for Appellant : Rajendra Tiwari and ;Rajendra Mishra, Advs.

ORDERC.K. Prasad, J.1. In both the writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for quashing of the notification dated 19th of August, 1998 issued by the Chancellor of the University...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Jan 02 2001

Pressure Sensitive System (India) Ltd. Vs. Aristocraft International P ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-02-2001

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 299

Reported in : AIR2001MP135; 2001(5)MPHT130; 2001(3)MPLJ520

Advocate for Appellant : R.S. Patel, Adv. for Union of India and Security Paper Mills;Rajendra Tiwari, ;Ravindra Shrivastava and ;Mininder Bhatti, Advs.

Arun Mishra, J.1. Present Letters Patent Appeals - L.P.A. No. 118/2000, L.P.A. No. 124/2000 and L.P.A. No. 127/2000 have been respectively preferred by M/s. Pressure Sensitive System (India) Limited, Union of India and M/s. Aristrocraft International...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 07 2003

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Savita Sen and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-07-2003

Subject : Labour and IndustrialCivil

Acts : Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - Sections 30(1)

Reported in : 2004ACJ2134; [2004(102)FLR927]; (2004)IIILLJ250MP; 2004(3)MPHT7; 2004(2)MPLJ445

Advocate for Appellant : N.S. Ruprah, ;Rakesh Jain and ;Anoop Nair, Advs.;Narendra Chouhan, Adv. for Claimnants, ;Rajendra Tiwari and ;A.G. Dhande, Sr. Advs., ;P.D. Gupta, Dy. Adv. General and ;Naman Nagrath, Adv. (Amicus Cu

ORDERRajeev Gupta, J.1. These matters have been placed before us on a Reference by a Division Bench of this Court for decision on the following question of law :--'Whether the third proviso to Section 30(1), of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 11 2002

Sharique Ali and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-11-2002

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 3(1), 8, 14, 15, 16, 16(1), 19(1), 21, 26(1), 30(1) and (2), 35, 39, 39A, 41, 45, 46, 51A, 213, 226, 226(1), 254, 309, 311, 337 and 371E; Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmachariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya), 2000 - Sections 4, 5 and 6; University Grant Commission Act, 1956; Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmachariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya) Adhiniyam, 1978 - Sections 2, 4, 5, 9, 10 and 11; Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmachariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya) (Amendment) Act, 2000 - Sections 7; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 115; Society Registrikaran Act; Madhya Pradesh Viswa Vidyalaya Adhiniyam 1973; Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Institu

Reported in : 2002(1)MPHT315

Advocate for Appellant : N.S. Kale, ;Ravindra Shrivastava, ;R.P. Agrawal, ;R.N. Singh, ;N.C. Jain, ;Rajendra Tiwari, ;V.S. Dabir and ;S.L. Saxena, Sr. Advs., ;Sanjay Agrawal, Rohit Arya, ;Kishore Shrivastava, ;M. Bhatti, ;M

ORDERDipak Misra, J. 1. The centrum, issue that we are obligated to advert to in this batch of writ petitions, which are inseggregable and inseverable, is 'education' that makes a man a complete human being in...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 01 1989

R.K. Dubey Vs. M.P. State Agro Industries Development Corporation and ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-01-1989

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Dispute Act, 1947; Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 311

Reported in : (1992)IILLJ182MP; 1990MPLJ669

Advocate for Appellant : Rajendra Tiwari, Adv.

RAM PAL SINGH, J 1. By this petition filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for quashing that part of the order Annexure-P2 which relates to the posting of...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jun 19 1989

K.K. JaIn and anr. Vs. Smt. Masroor Anwar and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-19-1989

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Acts : Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Sections 2(18), 40B, 110AA and 110B; Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923

Reported in : 1990ACJ299; AIR1990MP87; 1989MPLJ690

Advocate for Appellant : Rajendra Tiwari, Adv.

B.C. Varma, J.1. The'order in this appeal shall also dispose of Miscellaneous Appeal No. 49 of 1981 (The Oriental Fire & General Insurance Company Limited, New Delhi, v. Smt. Masroor Anwar and Ors.) and the cross-objection...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 30 2005

Than Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-30-2005

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 - Sections 2, 5, 6, 6(2), 6A, 6B, 6C, 7, 11A, 49A, 95 and 95(1); Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Sanshodhan) Adhiniyam, 2001 - Sections 49; Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964; Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 18; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 15(3), 15(4), 17, 21, 29, 234G, 243, 243A, 243B, 243C, 243D, 243(G), 243H, 323(3A), 327, 329, 332, 333, 334, 371A and 371F; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 438; Indian Penal Code; Madhya Pradesh Gram Sabha (Procedure of Meeting) Rules, 2001 - Rules 3, 4 and 4(1)

Reported in : AIR2005MP170; 2005(2)MPLJ353

Advocate for Appellant : Rajendra Tiwari, Sr. Adv. and ;Deepak Panjwani, Adv. in W.P. No 1573/2001, ;J.K. Lodhi, Adv. in W.P. No. 2046/2001 and ;Mohammad Kasim, Adv. in W.P. No. 2495/2001

ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The present reference has arisen in a different factual matrix inasmuch as certain provisions of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for brevity 'the Act') that were incorporated by way...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 15 2003

State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Akeel Ahmad Khan

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-15-2003

Subject : Service

Acts : Service Law

Reported in : 2004(1)MPHT531

Advocate for Appellant : Rajendra Tiwari, Sr. Adv. and ;Vivek Ranjan Pandey, Adv.

ORDERKumar Rajaratnam, C.J.1. This L.P.A. is taken up for final disposal with the consent of parties.2. The person who sought for compassionate appointment is, the son of the deceased/employee (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') who had...

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