Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: coal mines nationalisation act 1973 chapter i preliminary Sorted by: recent Court: delhi Page 11 of about 257 results (0.068 seconds)

Mar 05 2015 (HC)

Om Prakash Chautala Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Court : Delhi

..... fact been occasioned thereby. 296. corresponding provision in the code of criminal procedure, 1973 akin to the above highlighted provision comprised in the prevention of corruption act, 1988 is enunciated hitherto-fore :- 465. finding or sentence when reversible by reason of error, omission or irregularity. (1) subject to the provisions ..... comparison. 279. the specimen signatures having been taken prior to 2006, they were required to confirm to the mandate prescribed under section 73 indian evidence act. as sapan haldar (supra) rightly points out, any such specimen signatures taken even after so directed by the magistrate would be inadmissible except when ..... questioned during his cross-examination about his previous convictions or bad character (which is otherwise impermissible under law in view of section 54 of indian evidence act, 1872). therefore, proviso (c) sub-clause (iii) expressly contemplates reception of evidence by an accused against the co-accused, however in such cases .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 2015 (HC)

Jindal Steel and Power Limited and Others Vs. Union of India and Anot ...

Court : Delhi

..... arbitrary and illegal, being violative of article 14 of the constitution of india as also contrary to section 3(1)(a) of the coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1973. dr singhvi further submitted that the supreme court was not concerned with how and in what manner the coal resources would be disposed of after the cancellation order. according to dr singhvi, there were several eventualities. the ..... other company incorporated in india, allotted a schedule i coal mine shall be granted a prospecting licence or a mining lease, as applicable, by the concerned state government in accordance with the mines and minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957. (10) in relation to schedule ii coal mines, the successful bidder which was a prior allottee, shall continue coal mining operations after the appointed date in terms of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 2015 (HC)

Jindal Steel and Power Limited and Another Vs. Union of India and Oth ...

Court : Delhi

..... arbitrary and illegal, being violative of article 14 of the constitution of india as also contrary to section 3(1)(a) of the coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1973. dr singhvi further submitted that the supreme court was not concerned with how and in what manner the coal resources would be disposed of after the cancellation order. according to dr singhvi, there were several eventualities. the ..... other company incorporated in india, allotted a schedule i coal mine shall be granted a prospecting licence or a mining lease, as applicable, by the concerned state government in accordance with the mines and minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957. (10) in relation to schedule ii coal mines, the successful bidder which was a prior allottee, shall continue coal mining operations after the appointed date in terms of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 2015 (HC)

Montreaux Resorts P. Ltd and Ors. Vs. Sonia Khosla and Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... good name in man and woman, dear my lord is the immediate jewel of their souls; who steals my purse, steals trash; its something, nothing; 't was mine, its his, and has been slate to thousands; but he that filches from me my good name, robs me of that which not enriches him and makes me poor ..... demands tolerance and detachment of a high order. according to him the considerations, as noticed in the judgment, led to the enactment of the contempt of courts act, 1971 which makes some restrictive departures from the traditional law and implies some wholesome principles which serve as unspoken guidelines in this branch of law. section 2( ..... sentiments of the worshippers who through his mediation and assistance seek spiritual gain and contentment.56. availability of an independent judiciary and an atmosphere wherein judges may act independently and fearlessly is the source of existence of civilisation in society. the directions issued by the court must be obeyed. it is the binding efficacy attaching .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 22 2014 (HC)

Manoj Pant Vs. State and Anr.

Court : Delhi

..... prevail over the provisions contained in general law like cr.p.c., which generally applies to all the complaints, challans, etc. section 140 of dp act, falling in the miscellaneous chapter xi imposes certain restrictions and limitations with regard to institution of suits and prosecution against police officers in respect of the alleged ..... the prosecution or suit shall not be entertained and if entertained shall be dismissed if it is instituted, more than three months after the date of the act complained of: provided that any such prosecution against a police officer or other person may be entertained by the court, if instituted with the previous sanction ..... using abusive and threatening language. the complainant mr. jai prakash sharma also started shouting. mr. ramesh pandit was detained under section 65 of the delhi police act. a case bearing fir no.237/2009 under sections 186/353 ipc was registered against brother of complainant namely mr. ramesh pandit.5. after recording pre-summoning .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 22 2014 (HC)

Manoj Pant Vs. State and Anr.

Court : Delhi

..... prevail over the provisions contained in general law like cr.p.c., which generally applies to all the complaints, challans, etc. section 140 of dp act, falling in the miscellaneous chapter xi imposes certain restrictions and limitations with regard to institution of suits and prosecution against police officers in respect of the alleged ..... the prosecution or suit shall not be entertained and if entertained shall be dismissed if it is instituted, more than three months after the date of the act complained of: provided that any such prosecution against a police officer or other person may be entertained by the court, if instituted with the previous sanction ..... using abusive and threatening language. the complainant mr. jai prakash sharma also started shouting. mr. ramesh pandit was detained under section 65 of the delhi police act. a case bearing fir no.237/2009 under sections 186/353 ipc was registered against brother of complainant namely mr. ramesh pandit.5. after recording pre-summoning .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 2014 (HC)

Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private School Vs. Honble Lt.Gover ...

Court : Delhi

..... sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves with ..... intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made in the affidavits ..... the state, as if it was filling the seats available to be filled up at its discretion in such private institutions. this would amount to nationalisation of seats which has been specifically disapproved in pai foundation [(2002) 8 scc481 . such imposition of quota of state seats or enforcing reservation policy .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 2014 (HC)

Forum for Promotion ofquality Education for All Vs. Lt. Governor of De ...

Court : Delhi

..... sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves with ..... intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made in the affidavits ..... the state, as if it was filling the seats available to be filled up at its discretion in such private institutions. this would amount to nationalisation of seats which has been specifically disapproved in pai foundation [(2002) 8 scc481 . such imposition of quota of state seats or enforcing reservation policy .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 2014 (HC)

Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private School Vs. Honble Lt.Gover ...

Court : Delhi

..... sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves with ..... intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made in the affidavits ..... the state, as if it was filling the seats available to be filled up at its discretion in such private institutions. this would amount to nationalisation of seats which has been specifically disapproved in pai foundation [(2002) 8 scc481 . such imposition of quota of state seats or enforcing reservation policy .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 28 2014 (HC)

Forum for Promotion ofquality Education for All Vs. Lt. Governor of De ...

Court : Delhi

..... sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves with ..... intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made in the affidavits ..... the state, as if it was filling the seats available to be filled up at its discretion in such private institutions. this would amount to nationalisation of seats which has been specifically disapproved in pai foundation [(2002) 8 scc481 . such imposition of quota of state seats or enforcing reservation policy .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //