10 And 12 - Judgment Search Results

Date of Decision:-10.12.2012 Vs. Versus

Court: Punjab and Haryana

same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the instant petition in this relevant direction. 10.12.2012 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge

Date of Decision:10.12.2012 Vs. State of Punjab and Others

Court: Punjab and Haryana

appeal is allowed in the above terMs.( HEMANT GUPTA ) JUDGE ( RAJIV NARAIN RAINA ) JUDGE 10 12.2012 rajeev/Vimal … in Civil Appeal No.5055 of 2012 titled 'Asha versus Pt. B.D.Sharma University of Health Sciences & otheRs.decided on 10.07.2012. The present appeal is allowed in the above terMs.( HEMANT GUPTA ) JUDGE ( RAJIV NARAIN RAINA )

Madras Auto Rickshaw Drivers' Co-operative Society Vs. Commissioner of ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: [2001]249ITR330(SC)

Matched in: Parties Madras Auto Rickshaw Drivers' Co-operative Society Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (10.12.1998 - SC)

National Textile Workers' Union and Ors. Vs. P.R. Ramakrishnan and Ors ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1983SC75; [1983]53CompCas184(SC); (1983)1CompLJ1(SC); (1983)ILLJ45SC; (1983)IIMLJ1(SC); 1982(2)SCALE1144; (1983)1SCC228; [1983]1SCR922

for winding up, said :After the amendment of Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act by Sections 10 and 11 of the Companies (Amendment) Act (LIII of 1963), it would appear that the affairs of the company … High Court has passed the following order :This is a petition filed by the appellants in O.S.A. No. 128 of 1981 for permitting the first appellant/company to raise with its Bankers viz., Bank of Baroda, Coimbatore, a

Employees' Provident Fund Organisation Vs. Sportking India Limited and ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: (2010)157PLR500

Matched in: Parties Employees' Provident Fund Organisation Vs. Sportking India Limited and Anr. (10.12.2009 - PHHC)

W.H.D. 'Cruz and Sons Vs. the Board of Trustees of the Port of CochIn ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(1)KLJ176

reported to the Deputy Wharf Superintend. The petitioner had also provided the guarantee for the damage. However, till 10-12-1990 there was no communication from the respondent. The claim was made after the vessel had left the Port.

The Tata Hydro-Electric Power Supply Co. Ltd. and others Vs. Tata Hydr ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998(2)ALLMR486; 1998(3)BomCR128; (1998)1BOMLR597; [1998(79)FLR202]; 1998(1)MhLj915

the establishment. Certification is thereafter done by virtue of section 5 of the Act. In terms of section 10 of the Act, the standing order finally certified are not liable for modification until the expiry of six … to expire under section 2-A. There is a procedure to modify the standing orders. By virtue of section 12A notwithstanding anything contained in sections 3 to 12, for the period commencing on the date on which the

People's Union for Civil Liberties and others Vs. the State of Maharas ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1998BomCR(Cri)741; (1998)1BOMLR431; 1998CriLJ2138

therefore, is to develop scientificmethods of investigation and train the investigators properly to interrogate to meet the challenge.' 12. Mr. Manohar strenuously urged that when the lives of many innocent people are at the mercy of the … to further direct the State Government to take action against the erring police officers. In Writ Petition No. 1032 of 1997 filed by the President of Samajwadi Party, an inquiry is specifically sought in the death of

Percept D'Mark (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Zaheer Khan and Anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2004(1)ALLMR384; 2004(2)BomCR47; (2006)5CompLJ271(Bom)

petitioner for managing his affairs and the petitioner was entitled to the commission thereon. Under Clause No. 11 and 12, all work related expenses including travel undertaken by the respondent No. 1 were to be reimbursed by the … July, 2003 offering to renew the contract on the terms and conditions mentioned therein. By a reply dated 10th September, 2003, the respondent No. 1 informed the petitioner of its intention of not renewing and/or extending the

Stephen D'Silva Vs. Jaipur Chalchitra Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1993(3)WLC545; 1992WLN(UC)287

became Rs. 19,338. A notice was, therefore, served upon the respondent on 27.7.85 whereupon the respondent paid Rs. 10,932.50 by cheque, which included rent from 1.7.84 to 30.6.85, and also rent for the month of July and