Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: insecticides act 1968 section 26 notification of poisoning Sorted by: recent Page 100 of about 3,431 results (0.136 seconds)

Artee Minerals and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2002(3)WLN658; 2002(3)WLN658

..... complaint, which the prayer that the proceedings of criminal case no. 162/87 state v. thakar das rajendra kumar and ors. for the offence under section 2, 18/29 of the insecticides act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the act of 1968') pending in the court of judicial magistrate, first class, anoopgarh (sri ganganagar) be quashed.2. it arises in the following circumstances;-on 18.4 ..... by the insecticide analyst, the dates of manufacture of the article and the expiry date are mentioned. it means the expiry date of sample is very much material in deciding such type of matters.11. section 30 of the act of 1968 provides for defences which may or may not be allowed in prosecution under the act of 1968. section 30(1) of the act of 1968 only prescribes .....

B.L. Agrawal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [2002(92)FLR813]; RLW2003(3)Raj1565; 2002(4)WLN154

..... that the proceedings of criminal case no. 77a/91 state v. merta krishak kraya vikrya sahakari samiti, merta city and ors. for the offence under section 29 of the insecticides act, 1968 (herein-after referred to as 'the act of 1968') pending in the court of judicial magistrate first class, merta city be quashed.2. it arises on the following circumstances:-on 5.7.1991, a ..... the complainant or the accused, as the court shall direct.'8. section 21 of the act of 1968 empowers the insecticide inspector to take samples of any insecticide and send such samples for analysis to the insecticide analyst for test in the prescribed manner and as per sub-section (5) of section 22-of the act of 1968, he shall divide the sample into three portions and effectively seal and .....

M. Yusuf and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : RLW2003(3)Raj1639; 2002(5)WLC793; 2002(1)WLN192

..... cr.p.c. has been filed by the accused petitioners, who are ., abu road and ors. (1), for the offence under section 29(1)(a) of the insecticides act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 1968') pending in the court of judicial magistrate, first class, abu road be quashed.2. it maybe stated here that dealer m/s. abu road krishi kraya ..... . on 22.8.1992, the learned judicial magistrate, abu road took cognizance against the accused petitioners and others mentioned in the complaint for the offence under section 29(1)(a) of the act of 1968 and thereafter, notices were issued to the accused petitioners as well as to the dealer by the court.thereafter, on behalf of the dealer m/s. ..... not effected on the present accused petitioner upto 3.12.1992.4. in this petition under section 482 cr.p.c., looking to the above facts, it has been submitted by the accused petitioners that since the date of manufacturing of the insecticide in question was 4.1.1991 and date of expiry was 3.12.1992 and till then .....

Mehta Krishi Kendra and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : RLW2003(1)Raj472; 2002(1)WLN264

..... carries weight. the punjab and haryana high court in the case of tarsem singh (supra) held that in every enactment, for example insecticides act, 1968, prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 and drugs and cosmetics act, 1940 there is a provision to send the sample for re-testing to the central laboratory and since in the order of 1985 there ..... 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(c)(iii) of the fertiliser (control) order, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the order of 1985) punishable under section 3/7 of the essential commodities act be quashed and simultaneously the complaint filed by the fertiliser inspector be also quashed. 4. it arises in the following circumstances:- , i) rajmal mehta, assistant ..... in so many cases has held that when a law is declared to the invalid, it should be declared prospectively and not retrospectively. since in the present case section 19 was declared violative of article 19 of the constitution of india on 16.9.96 and sample was taken on 9.7.98, therefore, this judgment .....

Goyal Iron and Steel Works (India) Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra

..... -b, no roving enquiries could be made. reliance was placed on the decisions reported in vettti wines v. ito (1997) 63 ytd 125 (mad) (tm) and cit v. geo industries insecticides (i) (p) ltd. (1998) 234 itr 541 (mad). while relying on the decision of hon'ble allahabad high court in the case cit v. late sunder lal (1974) 96 ..... period. the learned counsel, therefore, stated that there was no error in the orders passed by ao and, therefore, the cit has wrongly assumed jurisdiction under section 263 of the act. the order under section 263 passed by cit deserves to be cancelled. on the other hand, the learned departmental representative supported the order of the cit.12. we have considered the ..... " has to be read in conjunction with an erroneous order passed by the ao. as has been held in various cases reported in rajpyari devi saraogi v. cit and ors.(1968) 67 itr 84 (sc): tara devi agarwal v. cit (1973) 88 itr 323 (sc) and (2000) 243 itr 83 (sc) (supra), every loss of revenue as a consequence of .....

Goyal Iron and Steel Works (India) Vs. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Agra

Reported in : (2002)76TTJAgra578

..... b, no roving enquiries could be made. reliance was placed on the decisions in vettri wines v.ito (1997) 63 ltd 125 (mad) (tm) and cit v. geo industries insecticides (i) (p) ltd. (1998) 234 itr 541 (mad). while relying on the decision of hon'ble allahabad high court in the case cit v. late sunder lal (1974 ..... learned counsel, therefore, stated that there was no error in the orders passed by assessing officer and, therefore, the commissioner has wrongly assumed jurisdiction under section 263 of the act. the order under section 263 passed by commissioner deserves to be cancelled. on the other hand, the learned departmental representative supported the order of the commissioner.we have considered the ..... revenue" has to be read in conjunction with an erroneous order passed by the assessing officer. as has been held in various cases in rajpyari devi saraogi v. cit & ors.(1968) 67 itr 84 (sc) : tara devi agarwal v. cit (1973) 88 itr 323 (sc) and (2000) 243 itr 83 (sc) (supra), every loss of revenue .....

Ashok Sureshchand Bal and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)1BOMLR483; 2002(1)MhLj211

..... can give evidence to disprove such fact,20. in state of haryana v. unique farmaid (p) ltd. and others (supra), while dealing with the provisions of insecticides act, 1968, the accused within the statutory time limit had notified to the inspector of his intention to adduce evidence in controversion of the analyst's report and requested him ..... , reported in : 2001crilj1686 .15. coming to the last submission of learned advocate for the petitioners which centers around the valuable right as provided under section 25(4) of the act, it has been urged by the learned advocate for the petitioners that on account of negligence inaction on the part of the prosecution agency, this valuable ..... its discretion at the request either of the complainant or the accused cause the sample of the drug (or cosmetic) produced before the magistrate under sub-section (4) of section 23 to be sent for test or analysis to the said laboratory, which shall make the test or analysis and report in writing signed by, or .....

Mr. Sudhir Bhatia and ors. Vs. M/S Midas Hygiene Industries (P) Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 94(2001)DLT639

..... were in fact using the word magic laxman rekha since 1989. the appellant claimed to be manufacturing under a license issued by collector/licensing authority, dnh(ut) and insecticides act, 1968 and in pursuance to the permission to sell the said product in the state of maharashtra by the director, inputs and quality control, commissionerate of agriculture, maharashtra state ..... and action of infringement of trademark are totally different in nature. in cases of trademark it was a claim based on violation of statutory right under section 21 of the act while the claim of passing off was based on deceit and similarity of products. the learned counsel also referred to a recent judgment of the ..... the manager of the said appellants was caught red-handed and the duplicate goods were seized. subsequently appellant no. 1 was charged for commission of offences under section 120, 465 and 489 of the indian penal code, which case is stated to be still pending. it is further stated in the plaint that in the .....

Dharamsi Morarji Chemical Company Limited Vs. the Rajasthan Navsagar M ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2002(2)BomCR162; (2002)1BOMLR812; 2002(25)PTC372(Bom)

..... and natural). in the year 1978 that has also been extended for goods being chemical products used in industry, science, agriculture, horticulture, forestry (not being insecticides, fungicides and preparations for killing weed), manures (natural and artificial). the list of the various chemicals wherein petitioners have been using their mark was also produced ..... chhap' and 'ship brand' with the device of ship for the goods being chemical products used in industries, science, agricultural, horticulture and forestry (none being insecticides, fungicides and preparations for killing weeds) manures (natural and artificial).3. on 20.9.1979 the respondent nos. 2,3 and 4 who in the present ..... of the discussion.6. the first contention which i propose to consider and deal with is the objection under section 12(1) of the act. section 12(1) contemplates subject to the discussion under sub-section (3) that no trademark shall be registered in respect of any goods or description of goods which is .....

Novartis India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... distract from the fact that violations of rule having taken place. i also take note of the fact that the appellant has paid the interest as envisaged under section 11ab of the central excise act, but however the question is of imposition of penalty. nobody can doubt the legality of the imposition of the penalty as envisaged under rule 173q. it is ..... 1. the appeal itself is taken up for disposal with consent of both sides, after waiving pre-deposit.2. the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of insecticides falling under tariff sub-heading 3809.00.3. in february, 1999 officers of the department found certain irregularities in the maintenance of the accounts and a show cause notice was ..... and that the interest and 25% of the penalty amount having been paid on 9.6.2000. it is claimed before me that the intent and content of proviso to section 11ac which has come into force on 12.5.2000 should be followed. in the instant case the order was passed on 31.3.2000 should be followed. in the .....