Skip to content


Conjunctive - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: conjunctive Year: 1995 Page 1 of about 114 results (0.008 seconds)
May 22 1995 (HC)

Ram Singh Vs. State (Delhi Admn.)

Court: Delhi

Decided on: May-22-1995

Reported in: 1995CriLJ3838

having haematoma around the right eye and was having bub conjunctiva haemorrhage all these injuries on three persons were caused by

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 16 1995 (SC)

Amita Kaushish and ors. Vs. Sanjay Kaushish and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Nov-16-1995

Reported in: JT1995(8)SC507; 1995(6)SCALE617; (1996)7SCC19; [1995]Supp5SCR442

..... such a marriage is irregular fasid and not void batil therefore the bar of unlawful conjunction jama bainal mahramain renders a marriage irregular and not void consequently under the hanafi law .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 21 1995 (SC)

Sant Ram and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Nov-21-1995

Reported in: 1995(7)SCALE137; (1996)7SCC210; [1995]Supp5SCR540

..... 32 demonstrates that the legislature intended the said clauses to be read disjunctively and not conjunctively clause a of section 32 specifies that a document can be presented for registration by .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 19 1995 (SC)

Gurnam Singh and anr. Vs. State of Punjab

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Oct-19-1995

Reported in: 1995(4)Crimes260(SC); JT1995(8)SC235; 1995(6)SCALE70; 1995Supp(3)SCC743

..... such a marriage is irregular fasid and not void batil therefore the bar of unlawful conjunction jama bainal mahramain renders a marriage irregular and not void consequently under the hanafi law .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 25 1995 (SC)

Preeti Singh Vs. Sandeep Singh and Others

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Apr-25-1995

Reported in: AIR1995SC1851; I(1997)DMC104SC; 1995(3)SCALE165; [1995]3SCR743; 1995(2)LC270(SC)

..... conditions constitute the essence of the legislative scheme the expression necessary or expedient read in conjunction with the public purpose implied in the section does canalise the exercise of the power .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 28 1995 (SC)

Cheenothingal Valli Vs. Cheenothingal Velayudhan and Others

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Mar-28-1995

Reported in: AIR1995SC1471; JT1997(10)SC529; 1995(2)SCALE667; (1995)3SCC582; 1995(2)LC68(SC)

..... r 698 approved an acceptable formula of co relating the notion of real income in conjunction with the method of accounting for the purpose of computation of income for the purpose .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 31 1995 (HC)

Shankar Hanamant Karaning Vs. State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Oct-31-1995

Reported in: 1996CriLJ2332; ILR1996KAR458; 1995(5)KarLJ408

..... other proceeding for relief under sub section 2 has to be read disjunctively and not conjunctively otherwise it leads to absurdity when the legislature has consciously used the aforesaid two different .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Dec 04 1995 (SC)

Gyan Chand Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Dec-04-1995

Reported in: JT1995(9)SC222; 1995(7)SCALE302; (1996)7SCC184; [1995]Supp6SCR161

..... such a marriage is irregular fasid and not void batil therefore the bar of unlawful conjunction jama bainal mahramain renders a marriage irregular and not void consequently under the hanafi law .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 10 1995 (HC)

Laxami Narayan Rice Mills and anr. Vs. the State Bank of India, Deogha ...

Court: Patna

Decided on: Feb-10-1995

..... firm they may file the suit in their individual names either in conjunction with the firm or without the firm as one of the partners ..... sue or are sued in their individual names as partners either in conjunction with or without the firm aid oforder xxx c p c is ..... or against two or more persons in their individual names as partners in conjunction with the firm or without the firm and any of them dies .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 20 1995 (HC)

Brij Mohan and 20 ors. Vs. State and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Mar-20-1995

Reported in: 1995(3)WLC321; 1995(1)WLN451

..... considering the question whether words arms and ammunition should be read conjunctively for the purpose of section 5 of the tada act have ..... the words arms and ammunition in section 5 should be read conjunctively we do not think so 30 in a recent decision of ..... where it may be debatable whether the direct accusation made in conjunction with the attendant circumstances if proved to be true is likely .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

  • << Prev.

Sign-up to get more results

Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.

Start Free Trial

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