First Preference - Judgment Search Results

My Preferred Transformation & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. versus M/S ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: [2025]1S.C.R.729

fell during the High Court’s summer vacation between 04.06.2022 and 03.07.2022 - Appellants filed application u/s.34 on the first date of court’s reopening on 04.07.2022, alongwith with the condonation application - Single Judge of the High Court … [2025] 1 S.C.R. 729 : 2025 INSC 56 My Preferred Transformation & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. M/s Faridabad Implements Pvt. Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. 336 of

Prefer Chanchal Baiju vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Court: Kerala

V WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 8423 OF 2024 PETITIONER: PREFER CHANCHAL BAIJU AGED 24 YEARS S/O BAIJU CHENGOTT RESIDING AT CHENGOTT HOUSE OZONE HOUSE, PANTHEERANKAVU P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,

In Re: Preference from a District Judge Under Section 49 of the Genera ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1884)ILR5Mad18

Matched in: Parties In Re: Preference from a District Judge Under Section 49 of the General Stamp Act.

Bell Vs. Preferred Life Assur. Soc'y

Court: US Supreme Court

Bell v. Preferred Life Assur. Soc'y - 320 U.S. 238 (1943) U.S. Supreme Court Bell v. Preferred Life Assur. Soc'y, 320

Alice Marie Vandepitte Vs. the Preferred Accident Insurance Company of ...

Court: Privy Council

Insured's household other than a chauffeur or domestic servant; provided that the indemnity payable hereunder shall be applied, first, to the protection of the named Insured, and the remainder, if any, to the protection of the other … between the insured E. E. Berry and two separate insurance companies, the New Jersey Insurance Company and the Preferred Accident Insurance Company, the respondents. It embodied the terms of application by E. E. Berry and the Statutory

Los Angeles Vs. Preferred Communications

Court: US Supreme Court

Water and Power (DWP), in Federal District Court, alleging, inter alia, a violation of its rights under the First Amendment by reason of (1) the city's refusal to grant respondent a cable television franchise on the ground … Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications - 476 U.S. 488 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications, 476 U.S. 488 (1986)

“this Is a Petition Preferred Under Section 438 Vs. State of Haryana ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Station Nuh, District Mewat. On 24.1.2014 the following order was passed by this Court:- “This is a petition preferred under Section 438 Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R.No.857 dated 29.11.2013 under

This Appeal Is Preferred Against Judgment of Conviction and Vs. State ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

dated 25.10.2004 passed by the Special Judge, Bathinda, vide which accused-appellant Harbhajan Singh was held guilty in case FIR No.152 dated 26.11.2002 registered at Police Station, Raman under Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 … Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Deep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon, J.This appeal is preferred against judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both dated 25.10.2004 passed by the Special Judge, Bathinda, vide

In a Suit Preferred by the Plaintiffs Seeking Possession by Way of Vs. ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

injunction against the defendants to protect their possession could not have been denied to them.6. As is evident, first round of litigation is over. Second round has been started by the plaintiffs. When the entire matter is … 30.5.2013 (Annexure P-2) passed by the District Judge, Jhajjar dismissing the appeal, are under challenge.2. In a suit preferred by the plaintiffs seeking possession by way of partition of land measuring 1 Bigha 17 Biswas, a preliminary

“that the Cited Appeal Was Preferred in Time. Vs. Balwinder Kaur and ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

been filed for condonation of the aforesaid delay. The application reads as under: “That the cited appeal was preferred in time. However, the true typed copy of the judgment of the Ld. Trial Court was not available.