Consequential - Judgment Search Results

Lallu Ram Son of Sri Ram Sewak, Vs. State of U.P. Through Principal Se ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1176

tarun agarwala j 1 heard sri ashok khare the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned standing...

Reckitt Benckiser (India) Limited Vs. Hindustan Unilever Limited

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(38)PTC170(Del)

badar durrez ahmed j 1 the plaintiff seeks an injunction restraining the defendant from telecasting an advertisement a story board...

The Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs Vs. Mustang Rubbers Ind ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2009(237)ELT257(Ker); 2008(3)KLJ115

c n ramachandran nair j 1 these connected appeals filed under section 35 g of the central excise act are...

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

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: RLW2009(2)Raj1843

gopal krishan vyas j 1 in this case the petitioner is challenging the order impugned dated 16 11 2007 annexure...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Goyal M.G. Gases Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2008)220CTR(Del)66; [2009]316ITR303(Delhi); [2009]176TAXMAN189(Delhi)

..... commissioner of income tax gave a specific direction that the assessing officer shall pass the consequential orders within a period of three months approximately 2 the assessee being aggrieved by ..... under section 263 has given a specific direction that the assessing officer shall pass the consequential orders within a period of three months approximately this direction would certainly fall within the .....

P.S. Bisht Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... agree with the hon ble member j with regard to the direction for reinstatement and consequential benefits because hon ble supreme court has repeatedly held whenever there is a technical ..... in the rules i clarify that applicant would not be entitled to either reinstatement or consequential benefits because charge is otherwise proved against the applicant respondents may put the applicant under .....

Raghava Health Care Ltd. Vs. Dcit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Vizag

..... had passed the order on 10 10 96 and accordingly the consequential order should have been passed before 31 3 99 since the ..... department 13 the contention of the ld departmental representative that the consequential order has been passed to give effect to the order of ..... cit a and hence the assessing officer had to pass a consequential order hence the reliance placed upon the above decision is also .....

Dr. G.V. Iyengar and Shri Mohanlal Sukhramdas Gogia Vs. Shri A.R. Samp ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR352; 2008(4)BomCR673; 2008(3)MhLj621

..... where declaration is sought with or without injunction or other consequential relief and the subject matter in dispute is not ..... a declaration was sought with or without injunction or other consequential relief and the subject matter in dispute is not susceptible ..... dr gopal ayengar with this declaration he also seeks certain consequential reliefs in the nature perpetual injunction etc section 6 .....

P.A. Mohandas Son of Gopalan Nair Vs. State of Kerala,

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2008(2)KLJ468; 2008(3)KLT62

..... court under ext p1 he was entitled to be reinstated with all back wages and consequential benefits though a further departmental enquiry was also conducted the charges levelled against the petitioner ..... the vigilance police and his implication in the criminal case in fact he was dismissed consequential upon the conviction by the criminal court but apparently under ext p3 order the government .....

Lal Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anr.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2009(3)AWC2321

..... 11 2001 informed the secretary lokayukta administration lucknow that pursuant to the aforesaid notional promotions consequential benefits are also being made available to the petitioner as a result of his promotion ..... the state government s letter dated 13 9 2002 the excise commissioner also passed a consequential order on 29 5 2003 rejecting petitioner s claim stating that despite of his notional .....