Chhattisgarh Court October 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Nandkishore Kanwar, Vs. District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd, and Ano ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-25-2010
1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent Bank to reimburse the petitioner a sum of Rs. 70,000/- with interest, which admittedly was deposited by the petitioner and withdrawn by some other person without verification of signatures. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner opened a saving account with the respondent Bank and had made several deposits. As per the records submitted to the petitioner, a sum of Rs. 30,000/- was given to some one on 12.2.2004 and Rs. 40,000/- has been withdrawn on 19.2.2004, showing that the same was done on the basis of false representation made by some other person. 3. Accordingly, the petitioner made a complaint on 21.2.2004 (Annexure P-2) and thereafter, one more application was made on 25.2.2004 (Annexure P-3). The Bank, through Manjit Singh Kaushal, S/o. Shri Joidhaji Kaushal, an officer of the Bank, after having examined the complaint and other facts, lodged an FIR against unknown person, stating ...
Barbrik Project Limited. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition and prayed for quashing of the order dated 6th February, 2010 (Annexure- P/1) whereby the petitioner's registration as a contractor in S-5 category in the Chhattisgarh Rural Road Development Agency (hereinafter referred to as `the CGRRDA') has been cancelled. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner's case is that M/s Bajrang Lal Agrawal, a partnership firm, was registered as S-5 contractor with the respondent CGRRDA since 2000. With the passage of time the business of the firm grew. Considering the same, almost all the partners of the firm decided for external expansion by incorporating a company limited by shares in the name and style of M/s Barbrik Project Limited in the year 2008 and accordingly, the petitioner was incorporated in the year 2008 and the certificate of incorporation was issued by the Registrar of Companies on 7th April, 2008 and the Company commenced the business w.e.f. 2nd May, 2008. 3. The petitioner vide its resolution dat...
Smt Neru Soni; Smt Vandna Soni. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, and anr.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-01-2010
1. Since both the writ petitions i.e. Writ Petition (C) No. 5789 of 2007 and Writ Petition (C) No. 5844 of 2007 involve common facts and question of law, thus, both are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Challenge in these petitions i.e. Writ Petition (C) No. 5789 of 2007 (for short `the first petition') and Writ Petition (C) No. 5844 of 2007 (for short `the second petition') is to the order dated 08.06.2007 (Annexure P/4) passed by the Estate Officer, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai, District Durg, whereby allotment of shop bearing No. F/16 in the first petition and No. F/15 in the second petition, Shitla Commercial Complex, Bhilai, to the petitioners on 27.03.2006, were cancelled, and the petitioners were directed to make an application for refund of the security deposit and other amount. 3. The indisputable facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioners, in both the writ petitions are that pursuant to the notice for auction sale, published in "Dainik Bhaskar", Raipur Edit...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›