Air 1990 Del 134 - Judgment Search Results

Reunion Engg. Co. Limited Vs. National Building Construction Corporati ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(1)ARBLR574(Delhi); 120(2005)DLT252; 2005(82)DRJ204

..... judge of this court in w s constructions co v hindustan steel works construction ltd air 1990 del 134 to contend that the position of law in respect of section 12 qua revocation and ..... been stated as follows in w s constructions co v hindustan steel works construction ltd air 1990 del 134 by a learned single judge y k sabharwal j as he then was to the .....

Niwas Khandsari Udyog, Village Hilalpur, Chandpur, Bijnor and Another ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2030

..... all 225 parmalal v mashina mohanty air 1990 ori 102 bahadur pradhani v gopal patel air 1964 ori 134 surajbhan gupta v union of india and others air 1977 del 158 and ganga river transport v ..... jute company and others air 1982 cal 290 15 .....

Rolta India Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation

Court: Mumbai

..... 671 691 all india management association vs uoi manu del 1431 2008 mayawanti vs kaushalya devi 1990 3 scc 1 commissioner of income tax new delhi ..... bank of india 1998 4 bom c r 124 134 radha sundar dutta vs mohd jahadur rahim air 1959 sc 24 smt bina das gupta vs ..... ltd vs central bank of india 1998 4 bom c r 124 134 in which the court observed that when two different words although practically .....

Chandramathi Amma Vs. Malanadu Co-operative Bank

Court: Kerala

Reported in: AIR2000Ker69

state electricity board v t p k 1976 ker lt810 air 1977 sc 282 that the residuary article namely article 137 years six months and 27 days expired on 19 3 1990 the execution petition was filed only on 7 6 1990 in execution of a decree the right to apply for delivery in a person to whom the certificate has been issued judgment debtor the application for delivery was governed by article 134 of the limitation act and one year having elapsed from

Shri Bhagat Singh Bhatia S/O Late Vs. Union of India (Uoi) (Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

as had been granted to applicants in oa no 608 1990 dated 10 04 1992 which was allowed by the tribunal constitution bench 1998 1 aislj 54 held that condonation of delay by the tribunal in a matter of pension where the 14 of the order of this tribunal in oa no 134 1998 dated 15 10 1999 the applicants accepted the revised

Pattan Sardar Khan Vs. Pattan Rasool Khan and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1994(1)ALT15

murthy cited the rulings in ramchandra bhagat v eva mitra air1960pat378 uddandi ramakrishna mudali v sivarama prasad air 1957 a p the third judgment debtor dismissed e a no 41 of 1990 filed by the revision petitioner holding that the same was from the above it is evident that there was a delay of about 5 years and 3 months in issuance of would have certainly employed the words sale certificate in article 134 of the limitation act and not the words when the

Muthusamy Vs. Mani,

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (2002)1MLJ689

period of limitationprovided for one year expires by 21 9 1990 the petitionerherein has not filed any application under rule 95 clear that the courtauction purchaser shall file the application for delivery ofpossession within one year from the date on which the rule 95 of code of civil procedure 1908 and article 134 of indian limitation act 1908 petitioner purchased property in court

Little Angles Public School Society and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 75(1998)DLT521

development authority v lala amarnath educational and human society another air1991delhi96 the petitioner has pleaded that the letter of allotment was the petitioner the petitioner has given undertaking dated 13 3 1990 that it would pay the additional amount as determined by land was to be allotted under rule 5 of the delhi development disposal of nazul lands rules 1981 hereinafter referred to the petitioner to pay further sum of rs 5 39 134 stating that the demand was made as the government revised

Parchuri Rajya Lakshmir Vs. Parchuri Viswa Sankara Prasad

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1995AP147; 1995(1)ALT628

delhi high court in smt chitra lekha v ranjit rai air1977delhi176 taking the same view as in emani venkateswarlu 1986 2 of rs 150 per month with effect from 1 12 1990 i e the date on which this court remanded the section 24 application 14 there is the decision of the delhi high court in smt chitra lekha v ranjit rai air1977delhi176 in emani venkateswarlu v emani padmavathi 1986 2 ap lj 134 where also similar cryptic view was taken of an order

Pradeep Anand Vs. I.T.C. Ltd. and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR2002SC2799; 2002(5)ALD33(SC); 2002(2)ARBLR626(SC); 98(2002)DLT781(SC); JT2002(5)SC518; 2002(5)SCALE363; (2002)6SCC437; 2002(2)LC1165(SC)

pradesh co operative federation ltd v sunder brothers of delhi air1967sc249 in which it was observed inter alia that it is main contesting party in the case 3 on 11 9 1990 an agreement styled as co operation agreement was made in personal guarantees given by shric 16 of 1995 in the delhi high court challenging the legality and validity of the co order passed by the division bench in fao os no 134 99 dismissing the appeal in the former order of the