Difference - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: difference Sorted by: recent Year: 2012 Page 1 of about 301 results (0.063 seconds)A. Bhumanna Vs. Dr. Vidyasagar and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... aspect of the postoperative stage treatment and the complaints thereof is equally divided different doctors expressed different opinions and no doctor has expressed definite opinion in certain terms neither the ..... of post operative rehabilitation exercises to be done by the patient witness adds that different persons depending on their exercise tolerance will take individual time periods it is true .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTPremarajan Vs. Superintendent of Police
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... originally stipulated to be made w p c no 29956 of 2012 2 with a different alignment and it has now been caused to be changed at the instance of somebody .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTManjit Singh Vs. Rajinder Singh and Others
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... father shri rania and during consolidation of holdings came to be allotted to him under different numbers is also stated to have not been properly appreciated further according to the plaintiff .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCdr Good Health Club Rep. by Its Chairman, Dayakar Reddy Vs. C. Ranga ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... the opposite party as shown in the complaint as well as in the fdr are different from the parties arrayed in the petition in ca 905 2007 in ca 1480 2006 .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT1) Mohd. Ashraf Dar Vs. State of Jandk; and ors
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... under conclusion from the above quoted details and the perusal of record provided by the different agencies the following conclusions have been drawn a the unit m s gateway sports industries ..... s gateway sports industries g t road hatlimore kathua during 2011 12 as per the different permits issued by the competent authority of the district industries centre kathua and subsequently under .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTD. Sudershan Vs. the State Represented by the Dy. Superin
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... 1 and 2 were won over by the appellant and thus they gave a total different version to which they gave before investigating officer while their statements were recorded under section .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRaavi Satish Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... for the petitioners and the learned government pleader for revenue before adverting to the different categories of cases it is felt necessary to give a brief historical background leading ..... the judgments therein have attained finality notwithstanding the legal position settled by this court on different aspects the registering officers have been ignoring these judgments and driving the parties to .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBalla Appa Rao Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by It
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... that steps should be taken to constitute the executive council within a stipulated time a different view cannot be taken in this writ petition one of the members of the search .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCairn Energy India Pty Limited, Surasani Vs. Central Board of Excise a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... actually received on account of evaporation and loss in transit of the crude oil 7 differences arose between the petitioner and the central excise department in respect of the quantities of ..... also furnish a list of records maintained and reports returns submitted by them to the different authorities to the assistant collectors of central excise quot subsequently the 1st respondent issued a .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMustafa Kamal Vs. State of Kerala
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-31-2012
..... far as petitioners 1 to 3 are concerned the position of the fourth petitioner is different and it is felt that his continued custody is unnecessary accordingly the application is allowed .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>
Sign-up to get more results
Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.
Start Free Trial