Information Technology Amendment Act 2008 Section 38 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: information technology amendment act 2008 section 38 Year: 2019 Page 1 of about 332 results (3.765 seconds)The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. A Kalaimani
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Aug-08-2019
ipc and section 66 read with 43 1 of the information technology amendment act 2008 a writ petition was filed before and section 66 read with 43 1 of the information technology amendment act 2008 a writ petition was filed before the section 66 read with 43 1 of the information technology amendment act 2008 a writ petition was filed before the madurai learned single judge was convinced that the irregularities and corrupt activities pervaded through the entire process of selection the learned single read with 43 1 of the information technology amendment act 2008 a writ petition was filed before the madurai bench of of 2017 by the central crime branch for offences under sections 465 468 471 417 4 201 120b of ipc and
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTFacebook Inc vs.surinder Malik & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2019
not performing any active role in the posting of such information by third party alleged infringers have a duty only to and passing off and under section 74 of the information technology act 2000 hereinafter it act seeking protection of the trademark r w section 151 cpc relist for arguments on these amendment applications while hearing the submissions of both the sides in the subject matters laid down in article 19 2 unlawful acts beyond what is laid down in article 19 2 obviously of section 79 3 by following due diligence the said section and the guidelines thereunder have been interpreted by the supreme 2019 for exemption in cm m 1263 2019 cm appl 38535 2019 for exemption in cm m 1267 2019 1 allowed
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTInstagram Llc vs.surinder Malik & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-28-2019
competent court the intermediary applying its own mind to whether information should or should not be blocked is noticeably absent in up by third parties concerned is governed by the information technology intermediaries guidelines rules 2011 considering the provisions of the it r w section 151 cpc relist for arguments on these amendment applications while hearing the submissions of both the sides in section 74 of the information technology act 2000 hereinafter it act seeking protection of the trademark da milano the plaintiff claims under order 39 rule 1 and 2 cpc r w section 151 cpc relist for arguments on these amendment applications while applications are disposed of cm m 1263 2019 cm appl 38449 2019 for stay cm m 1267 2019 38534 2019 2
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAmway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs.1mg Technologies Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-2019
..... of section 79 3 b of the information technology act has been met with whilst the defendant ebay has a point in highlighting the distinction ..... it would require amendment in the laws moreover the guidelines are to be enforced by states and ..... 32 34 38 39 40 48 49 in cs os 480 2018 with similar averments being made ..... pvt ltd 152 2008 dlt117 sc hereinafter ndmc v tanvi trading 94 it is submitted that .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRojer Mathew Vs. South Indian Bank Ltd and Ors Chief Manager
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Nov-13-2019
..... the nclt7 nclt 8 nclat 9 administrative tribunals act 1985 information technology act 2000 companies act 1956 as amended chapter 1b 13 part a and nclat several suggestions to amend part 1 b and 1 c were issued ..... authority of india act 2008 27 of 2008 xix section 22 of the national green tribunal act 2010 19 of 2010 xx section 423 of the companies act 2013 18 of 2013 114 xxi section 38 of the pension .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTShubham Bansal vs.the State ( Govt of Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-2019
the commission of an offence under section 66a of the information technology act hereinafter referred to as the it act though commission of an offence under section 66a of the information technology act hereinafter referred to as the it act though the consisted of the maximum punishment to one year before the amendment therefore finding the challan has not been filed within one power under section 473 cr p c must precede the act of taking cognizance under section 190 1 b cr p would first refer to mander singh and others versus ladi 2008 4 r c r criminal 388 the court while dealing issue raised by the accused petitioner in the petitioner under section 482 cr p c pertaining to limitation in filing the and others versus ladi 2008 4 r c r criminal 388 the court while dealing with section 253 cr p c
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSri Sunil Bharti Mittal Vs. Sri N Naresh Kumar
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-11-2019
required to give such information on the contrary if such information is not made available to the police officer then in ipc and sections 72 a and 66 a of information technology act 2000 2 a private compliant under section 200 cr telegraph act 1885 read with rule 419a of indian telegraph amendment rules 2007 by providing the mobile or landline number etc affect sections 123 and 124 of the 10 indian evidence act 1872 1 of 1872 or the bankers books evidence act summons or order or power any person required under this section merely to produce a document or other thing shall be
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/S T T K Prestige Ltd Vs. The Union of India Reptd by Its Finance Sec ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-06-2019
the calcutta high court had two issues before it the first was the question of constitutional validity see para 6 i salariesin order to appreciate the contentions and the effect of amendments it would be apposite to notice the scheme of it the purposes referred to in section 115wb 2 of the act as the percentage is on the basis of different class total income and fringe benefit is not included under sub section 2 of section 24 of act 1961 whereas under sub limit the omnipotence of the sovereign legislative power by judicial 38 interposition except so far as the express words of a
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRitika Jain vs.guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University& Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-29-2019
if therefore any clause or stipulation in the admission brochure information bulletin notice inviting applications for admission or any other such are the streams of computer science and engineering cse information technology it electricals and electronics engineering eee and mechanical and automation session 2018 19 3 the up gradation regulation may be amended for consideration in the next academic session 2018 19 and provisions of section 27 of guru gobind singh indraprastha university act 1998 9 of 1998 the board of management of the ordinance7 migration of students in pursuance of the provisions of section 27 of guru gobind singh indraprastha university act 1998 9 did not ipso facto amount to upgradation change of branch 38 in response to the above notice dated 10th may 2018
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/S. Mfar Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Comme ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-06-2019
..... the kvat act prior to amendment act no 5 of 2008 input tax restrictions specified in sections 11 12 ..... petitioners are deemed as assessed under section 38 of the act however the annual audited statement of ..... act other than a return furnished under sub section 3 of section 38 discovers any omission or incorrect statement therein other than as a result of an inspection or receipt of any other information .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT