2002 2 Scc33339 - Judgment Search Results

Mrs. Purnima Dhawan and anr. Vs. Agmoz Online Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2003(66)DRJ218

dated 20th march 2002 instead an application ta no 3521 2002 praying for modification clarification of the order dated 20th march defendant failed to comply with the order dated 19th october 2001 which lead the plaintiff to file ccp 7 the defendant

Chandrakumar Gendele and ors. Vs. Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalay, Bilasp ...

Court : Chhattisgarh

Reported in : [2002(94)FLR964]; 2002(2)MPHT77(CG)

that the vice chancellor passed the order on 20 1 2002 and as such their services are terminated with immediate effect the ground that the vice chancellor passed the order on 20 1 2002 and as such their services are terminated with

Bharatkumar S/O Shrimannarayan Agrawal, Vs. Anita Trust, Through Ku. P ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2003(1)BomCR230; 2002(4)MhLj597

of 1999 was brought into force with effectfrom 1 7 2002 2 after the application of the amending provisionsfrom 1 7 the high court was notjustified in extending its jurisdiction underarticle 227 of the constitution of india inthe present case according to

Shaik MohiuddIn Sohail and ors. Vs. Government of A.P. and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(4)ALD728; 2002(4)ALT278

already been issued by the 2nd respondent on 29 1 2002 therefore the petitioners cannot be permitted to compete for selection averred that they have enrolled as advocates in the year 2001 and have been practising as such and that they are

Cj International Vs. Ndmc

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 102(2003)DLT589

1 within four weeks list this application on 11th july 2002 2 this order was passed on application of the plaintiff within four weeks list this application on 11th july 2002 2 this order was passed on application of the plaintiff under

Jitender V. JaIn and anr. Vs. Living Media India Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2002(25)PTC230(Del)

just exceptions cm no 449 2002 fao os no 181 2002 2 after hearing counsel for the parties it is ordered per sections 17 and 106 of the sections 106 27 2 and 29 of the trade and merchandise marks act 1958

Vikash Kumar Kothari and anr. Vs. State Bank of India and ors.

Court : Guwahati

learned single judge vide the impugned judgment dated 26 3 2002 dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the validity ours will dispose of writ appeals nos 148 2002 149 2002 150 2002 151 2002 152 2002 153 2002 154 2002

Modern Food Industries (India) Limited Vs. I.K. Malik and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2002VIIIAD(Delhi)88; 98(2002)DLT593; 2002(63)DRJ451

the concession statement and consequently our order dated 18th march 2002 and heard the appellant on merits rfa no 193 20025 shall be liable to pay damages mesne profit rs 1 25 000 per month appellant defendant while acknowledging the notice declined

Land Acquisition Zone Officer Vs. Hadibandhu Behera and 15 ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 2003(I)OLR23

court sections 100 a as inserted by act 22 of 2002 110 104 letters patent 1865 clause 10 dr b s the said order was modified by order dated 17 5 2002 permitting not only the legal heirs of respondents 1 and

Dr. Pushpa Gupta Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : RLW2003(1)Raj702; 2002(4)WLC47

petitioner i dismissed the writ petition summarily on july 3 2002 with a note that reasons shall follow now i assign candidates are appointed in pursuance of the advertisement no 1 2001 2002 ii by further appropriate writ order or direction the