Skip to content
How to use Narrow results with filters
  1. Run a keyword search first to load the results page.
  2. Select Supreme Court, a High Court, or tribunal on the left.
  3. Optionally filter by decision year to focus on recent or historical cases.

Closing - Judgment Search Results

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Mar 05 1883

Close Vs. Glenwood Cemetery

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Mar-05-1883

Close v. Glenwood Cemetery - 107 U.S. 466 (1883) U.S. Supreme Court Close v. Glenwood Cemetery, 107 U.S. 466


Feb 14 2013

Respondents Gave Notice to the Petitioner Directing It to Close Down V ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Decided on: Feb-14-2013

was settled. It is further stated that on 22.10.2011, respondents gave notice to the petitioner directing it to close down Vajra Arbitration Case No.92 of 2012(O&M) 3 Cable Network in Jalandhar Cantt w.e.f.31.12.2011. The petitioner filed reply


Jan 19 2017

Tirupati Metal Udyog (Since Closed) vs.commissioner of Trade and Taxes ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jan-19-2017

9730/2016, C.M. APPL.38894/2016 + W.P.(C) 9732/2016 JAY PACKAGING COMMISSIONER OF VAT & ANR. versus TIRUPATI METAL UDYOG (SINCE CLOSED)........ Petitioner COMMISSIONER OF TRADE & TAXES & ANR......... RESPONDENTS versus M/S RAMA SALES CORPORATION THROUGH ITS KARTA SH.


18-section briefs on any result in this list

Mar 31 2000

Paresh Ramanlal AmIn Close Friend of Detenu Ramesh J. Shah Vs. State o ...

Court: Gujarat

Decided on: Mar-31-2000

Reported in: 2001CriLJ1; (2000)2GLR846

B.C. Patel, J.1. This matter has been placed before this Court in view of the order passed by the Honourable the Chief Justice as a Division Bench hearing this matter, on 22.6.1994, expressed an opinion that...


Nov 16 2009

Mr. Dinesh K. Suvarna Proprietor of Maruti Motors (Now Closed) Vs. Shr ...

Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai

Decided on: Nov-16-2009

Oral Order: Per Justice Mr. S.B. Mhase, Honble President There is delay of 456 days in filing the appeal. But the service in the present matter is disputed. We have also noted that the service has...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial