Contently - Judgment Search Results
“ the Contention of the Counsel for the Petitioners That Vs. Neena L ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Mar-02-2013
(in short 'PSTET').is illegal and not sustainable. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner fulfills
“ the Next Contention of the Counsel for the Vs. State of Punjab and ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Mar-02-2013
the corrigendum providing for this qualification cannot thus, sustain. This contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted in the light of
“that the Contents of Para No.4 of Writ Vs. State of Haryana and Oth ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
5 of the written statement, read as under:- “That the contents of para No.4 of writ petition are legal. However, the
18-section briefs on any result in this list
“The MaIn Contention Raised by the Ld. Counsel for the Vs. State of ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Nov-29-2012
dated 18.5.2012, which, in substance, is as under:- “The main contention raised by the Ld. counsel for the complainant/appellant is that
“The Contention of the Gram Panchayat Is That the C.O. Has Passed Vs ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Jul-10-2013
on 13.07.1990. Relevant portion of the order reads thus: “The contention of the Gram Panchayat is that the C.O.has passed the
“this Contention of the Counsel for the Petitioners May Be Vs. Shyam ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
other consequential benefits i.e.revision of pay w.e.f.1.1.1996. It was primary contention of the petitioners that qualifications are the same and nature
“that the Contents of Para No. 2 of the Civil Writ Petition Are Vs. ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Mar-31-2014
statement dated 18.01.2007 which reads as follows: - “That the contents of para No.2 of the Civil Writ Petition are wrong
Raj Dutta & Ors. Vs.lambda Content India Private Limited & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-2019
Khandhar & Mr.Sohil Shah & Mr.Tejas Patel, Advs. versus LAMBDA CONTENT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Abhinav Vasisht,
Indian Potash Ltd. Vs.media Contents and Communication Services (India ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-2019
Ms. Saumya Gupta & Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary, Advs. Versus MEDIA CONTENTS AND COMMUNICATION SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. & ANR. ...Respondents Through:
“there Is a Force in the Contention of Learned Defence Counsel. No V ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Jan-29-2013
under (Para 7) :- “There is a force in the contention of learned defence counsel. No doubt, in the FIR and
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free