1908 Sections 9 - Judgment Search Results
Chaman Lal JaIn and anr. Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-04-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ955; 1992(1)WLC76; 1991(2)WLN212; 1991(2)WLN259
of explosives. The case was registered for offences under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Section 9(b) of Explosives Act, 1884 and Section 6 of Territorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter
Smt. Balwant Kunwar and ors. Vs. Addl. Munsiff, Dehra Dun and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1958
Reported in: AIR1959All7
proceedings under this Act shall be regulated, as far as may be, by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.' Section 9 lays down that, if the petitioner makes out a case, the District Court may decree restitution … marriage was solemnized or the husband and wife reside or last resided together.'It may be noted that both Sections 9 and 19 emphasize that, a petition for restitution of conjugal rights ought to be presented to the district
Ravindra Harshad Parmar Vs. Dimple Ravindra Parmar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-11-2014
of the case. We shall now consider the effect of section 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Section 9-A is reproduced below: "Section 9-A. Where at the hearing of application relating to interim relief in … by the Family Court Pune in a petition filed by the Respondent-wife seeking divorce under the provisions of Section 13(1)(ia), 25 and 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act). The impugned order is passed on
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Surendra Kumar Choudhary. Vs. State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-02-2010
writ application is accordingly allowed. [Markandey Katju ; Gyan Sudha Misra, JJ.] - Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.) 1908 - Section 151 - Saving of inherent powers of Court -- This appeal has been filed against the … have no right to hold a Hat over the C.S. Plot No. 9, which is adjacent to Plot Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 21, where … the sake of argument, that the petitioner had acquired an occupancy right and the rent was commutated under Section 40, the petitioner cannot claim unfettered right to cause deterioration of the lands in question. It has been
Venkataraman @ Murali @ Raja, Vs. R. Venugopal and R. Ganesan @ Vinaya ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-14-2007
Reported in: (2008)2MLJ348
2.47. In : AIR1960Cal623 Jatindra Mohan Banerjee v. Kali Charan @ Kalipada Sarkar it is held thusCivil P.C. (1908), Sections 146, 47, Order 21 Rule 32 - Representative suit - Decree for injunction - Execution against parties not … ORDERM. Venugopal, J.1. The Civil Revision Petitioners herein are the respondents in Execution Petition No. 90 of 2002 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Pondicherry. 2. Before the lower Court, the
Arunachalam Pillai Vs. M. Velamma and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Mar-02-1967
Reported in: (1967)2MLJ490
or arrest the running of time, against the provisions of Section 9 of the Limitation Act (IX of 1908). Section 9 provides only that once time has begun to run, no subsequent disability or inability to sue, … in suspension of the original cause of action or arrest the running of time, against the provisions of Section 9 of the Limitation Act (IX of 1908). Section 9 provides only that once time has begun to
The Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority, Bangalore Vs. State ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: 2000(6)KarLJ204
Acts/Rules/Orders:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 9;Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 - Sections 36 and 64;Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4,
M. Lakshmi Devi Vs. M. Lakshmi Devi and Others
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Feb-24-1998
Reported in: 1999(4)KarLJ33
Acts/Rules/Orders:Family Courts Act, 1984 - Sections 7(1) Explanation and 8;Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Sections 9, 96 and 107;Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 59Cases Referred:Ram Chandra v. Muneshwar and Others, AIR 1962 All.
Joy Mathew vs State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-03-2023
He is being proceeded against for having committed offences punishable under Sections 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 & Section 9(B)(I)(b) of the Explosives Act.2. On his failure to promptly appear before the learned SessionsJudge, the
Sri.Rudra vs State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: May-02-2025
byRamapura Police Station, Chamarajanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Sections 9(B) and 1(b) of the Explosives Act, 1884 and Section 325 of the BNS, 2023, are before this
Hover bars for counts · use +/− or drag to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free