Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: apprentices amendment act 2007 section 4 amendment of section 10 Page 5 of about 226,025 results (0.829 seconds)

Kirti Azad vs.narinder Batra & Anr

Court : Delhi

..... and, until so defined shall be those of that house and of its members and committees immediately before the coming into force of section 15 of the constitution (forty fourth amendment) act 1978 (4) the provisions of clauses ( 1 ), ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) shall apply in relation to persons who by virtue of this constitution have the ..... to humiliation at social gatherings; questions about the plaintiff being raised as a result amongst members of the sports community. as per the plaint, these amongst other acts, have given rise to the cause of action for filing of the suit.19. before us, mr. tiwari, ld. senior counsel for the appellant does not ..... of publication of the allegedly defamatory statements; the averments in the plaint are wholly based on documents which have been obtained by the plaintiffs under the right to information (rti) act, 2005; and, (iv) that the plaintiffs in the plaint have loosely used the word libel or defamation , without substantiating the same. 9. upon consideration of .....

Smt. Uma Tiwari Vs. Vikrant Tiwari

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : I(2005)DMC690; 2005(1)MPHT360; 2005(1)MPLJ356

..... and wife at bhopal therefore, husband's application before the family court at gwalior is not maintainable. section 19 of the hindu marriage act is amended by marriage laws (amendment) act, 2003 on 23-12-2003. as per amendment cause of action to file petition shall be at place where wife is the petitioner and she is residing on the date of ..... may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnised before or after the commencement of the marriage laws (amendment) act, 1976, on the ground that they have not been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together ..... naturally have heard of him if he were alive.'11. thus, legislature has provided a place where petition can be filed. thus, by virtue of amendment in section 19 of the hindu marriage act, the petition can be filed in the case where wife is the petitioner, where she is residing on the date of presentation of petition. the .....

Gram Panchayat Village, Bathoi Kalan, Patiala Vs. Jagar Ram and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1991P& H159; (1991)99PLR260

..... was held by the division bench that the retrospective abrogation of jurisdiction of civil courts validly exercised by them from 1961 onwards, by section 4 of the act, haryana amendment act 2 of 1981 fictionally substituting section 13 with effect from may 4, 1961, and thereby giving rctrospectivity from that date clearly amounted to trenching upon the ..... property is situate, may, within a period of two years from the date of coming into force of the punjab village common l-ands (regulation) haryana amendment act, 1974 make an application for setting aside the decree to the assistant collector of the first grade having jurisdiction in the village wherein the land or other immovable ..... as the decrees therein have been passed by the civil courts in favour of the landowners comprising the land, in dispute, prior to the passing of the amending act no. 19 of 1976 whereas civil writ petition no. 1870 of 1986 is allowed and the orders of the joint director, panchayat, exercising the powers of .....

Smt. Mallamma Vs. Shri Mallegowda @ Karigowda

Court : Karnataka

..... 1 to 7, 10 and 11 / appellants 1 to 7, 10 and 11 is barred by proviso to section 6(1) of the hindu succession act as amended by hindu succession (amendment) act no.39 of 2005 with effect from 09.09.2005. thus claim of aforesaid plaintiffs is barred by law. it is pertinent to note that plaintiffs ..... ', air1977sc2421 'i.t.c.ltd. vs. debts recovery appellate tribunal', air1998sc634 'prem singh vs. birbal', air2006scw3595 and 'hardesh ores (p) ltd. vs. hede and co.', (2007) 5 scc614 8. we have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, perused the plaint as well as the documents annexed with it. before 14 proceeding further ..... adarsh kumar gil', air2014sc1476 'balasaria construction pvt. ltd. vs. 12 hanuman seva trust', (2006) 5 scc658 ['hardesh ores pvt. ltd. vs. m/s hede and co', 2007 air scw3456and 'vineeta sharma vs. rakesh sharma and others', air2020sc3717 7. on the other hand, learned senior counsel for respondent no.4 submitted that the suit filed by the plaintiffs .....

Seema Pathak Vs. Chotelal Pandey

Court : Jharkhand

..... divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marraige was solemnised before or after the commencement of the marriage laws (amendment) act, 1976 (68 of 1976), on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live ..... is no order preponing the date, but the suit has been allowed by dissolving the marriage between the parties on 16.5.2007, which is before the expiry of the period of six months from the date of the amendment made in the 5 petition, on which date, the case was admitted. the lower court record also shows that on 10 ..... justice dr. s.n. pathak ------- by court:- heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.2. the appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 16.5.2007 passed by the learned principal judge, family court, ranchi, in m.t.s. no. 205 of 2006, whereby the joint petition filed by the applicants under section 13-b of .....

Smt. Jayashree Ramesh Londhe Vs. Ramesh Bhikaji Londhe

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1984Bom302; 1984(1)BomCR586; (1983)86BOMLR184; 1984MhLJ308

..... divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnized before or after the commencement of the marriage laws (amendment) act, 1976, on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live; together and ..... above-mentioned circumstances would definitely show that the husband has filed the petition along with his wife for a divorce by mutual consent and that while doing so, he acted voluntarily. there was no question of any confused state of mind. thus, here is a case where there is abundant evidence to show that at the time when the ..... this is an appeal filed by the wife against the dismissal of the petition filed by her and the respondent (the husband) under section 13b of the hindu marriage act for getting a divorce by mutual consent.2. the marriage between the partiestook place on 12-3-1981. it appears that they lived together till 24th june 1981. the .....

Sudershan Goel Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 44(1991)DLT328; 1991RLR338

..... thereforee, any observations made in the rajasthan case on the basis of that clause cannot any linger hold good. it is arguable that the 44th constitution amendment act leaves no doubt that judicial review is not totally excluded in regard to the question relating to the president's satisfaction.'(4) in view of the aforesaid ..... learned counsel. it is true that the exercise of power under article 356 may be subject to judicial review after deletion of clause (5) by the 44th amendment. but the question is as to whether there are any genuine apprehensions on the part of the petitioner that the power under article 356 would not be properly exercised ..... obtaining in the state of bihar does not at all warrant imposition of president's rule. the learned counsel submitted that the presidential satisfaction is justiciable after the forty-fourth amendment, whereby clause (5) was deleted. he referred to a decision of the supreme court in a.k. roy v. union of india and another, : 1982crilj340 , where .....

Om Parkash Vs. Uda Ram and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2003)134PLR56

..... a part thereof to the third party. it would, therefore, be clear that as on the date the plaintiff has no right to claim pre-emption under the act as amended under the amendment act, 1995 as he had claimed his pre-emption right on the basis of co-shareship which has ceased to exist in view of the above said ..... during the pendency of the appeal the right of pre-emption of a co-sharer has been taken away by the amendment introduced by the government of haryana vide haryana amendment act, 1995 to the parent act i.e. punjab pre-emption act, 1913, as applicable to the state of haryana, and, therefore, the plaintiff-appellant has lost is superior right of ..... appeal of the appellant by holding that he has no superior right of pre-emption which has been taken away through the amendment in the punjab pre-emption act, 1913 incorporated by the government of haryana vide amendment act published in the gazette notification dated 17.5.1995.2. the brief facts of the case are that plaintiff om parkash filed .....

Vogel Media International Gmbh and anr. Vs. Jasu Shah and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 115(2004)DLT679; 2005(30)PTC51(Del)

..... transfer of the suit bearing no. cs(os) no.883/2001 to the district court was necessitated on account of provisions of section 2 of the delhi high court (amendment) act, 2003 (act no.35 of 2003) which was enforced w.e.f. 16.7.2003 vide a government of india notification of even date and the office order nos. 37/ ..... invoking the provisions of sub-section 5 of section 4 to the aid of the plaintiff held as under:'' sub-section 5 of this provision was inserted by civil procedure code (amendment) act, 1976 for the first time and its insertion was necessitated for the reason that some of the high courts in india were of the view that suit/appeal/ proceeding ..... was transferred to the district court on account of the change in the pecuniary jurisdiction of the high court and the district court consequent upon the delhi high court (amendment) act, 2003 and consequent upon the return of the plaint by the district court in terms of the order dated 30.4.2004 and on its representation before this court .....

Vinayaka House Building Co -Op Society Vs. Sri. Chikka Thimmaiah

Court : Karnataka

..... , unless the court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.]. proviso was inserted by amendment act 22/2002 w.e.f. 01.07.2002.12. the apex court in the case of state bank of hyderabad vs. town municipal council reported in air2007(1) scc765 has ..... 8. this court is inclined to set aside the order passed by the court below and allow the applications on the strength of the finding given in wp.no.19720/2007, for the reason that, if the finding of the learned single judge in the aforesaid writ petition is confirmed in the writ appeal, the fate of plaintiff so far ..... , appearing for abn amro bank submits before us that by filing of such an application for amendment of the written statement which has been filed with long delay, the appellant sought to stall the hearing of the suit which has been fixed on 13th july, 2007. in response to this mr. kapadia, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that in the .....