Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka preservation of trees act 1976 section 23 rules Court: delhi Page 8 of about 806 results (0.310 seconds)

Amitabh Bachhan Corporation Ltd. Vs. Om Pal Singh Hoon

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1996(37)DRJ352

..... apart from article 19(2) and section 5-b. clause (f) of article 51-a says that it shall be the duty of every citizen of india 'to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture'.. clause (j) requires us to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity, so that the nation constantly rises to ..... to be unable to draw the line between two things. who can draw the line between plants and animals and yet who has any difficulty in saying that an oak-tree is a plant and not an animal ?' (att.genl vs. brighton 1900 (1) ch. 276. but what lord coleridge said in mayor of southport vs. morris (1893) (1) q.b ..... her, shot him dead in a 'fit of rage. she was attracted towards vikram and joined his gang. along with vikram she visited her husband, tied him up with a tree and took her revenge by brutally beating him. her days of happiness with vikram were transitory. the thakur leader of the gang sri ram, who was released from jail, felt .....

Canoro Resources Ltd Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

..... accounts of the operations carried out at the oil fields in question. they shall remain bound by this undertaking and they are accordingly directed to maintain the complete accounts and preserve the same.104. in the light of the above considerations, the balance of convenience, in my view, lies in favour of the respondent, and against the petitioner.105. in the ..... the psc is a matter which will be resolved by the arbitral tribunal, pending which, the petitioner has prayed for the subject matter of the arbitration to be protected and preserved.discussion:56. having heard and considered the arguments of the learned counsel and upon giving my due consideration to the materials relied upon by them, i am of the view .....

P.V. Narsimha Rao Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1997VAD(Delhi)265; 68(1997)DLT553; 1997(43)DRJ108; 1997RLR567

..... or keep any document, or to take charge or dispose of any property, or to execute any judicial process, or to administer any oath, or to interpret, or to preserve order in the court, and every person specially authorized by a court of justice to perform any of such duties; fifth- every juryman, assessor, or member of a ..... none other but h.m.revanna and ramalinga reddy who had collected three suitcases and one bag from the residence of m.veerappa moily, the then chief minister of karnataka. two of those suitcases had been delivered to moily by his businessman friend m.thimmegowda after having stuffed them with the withdrawals in cash from the canara bank. ..... justified in ordering the framing of the charges and while considering the same i would keep in mind the warning given by the supreme court in the state of karnataka vs. l.muniswamy : 1977crilj1125 that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. i am making myself conscious .....

Afhq Civil Service (Direct Recruit Gazetted) Officers

Court : Delhi

..... read with rule 21 of the 1976 rules by fixing seniority according to the roster prescribed under rule 18 of the 1976 rules.31. in gonal bihimappa v. state of karnataka & ors. [1987 suppl. 207] relied upon by mr. p. vishwanath shetty, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the union of india, this court held that the quota rules has .....

institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences Vs. Govt. of Nct of D ...

Court : Delhi

..... adverse possession is concerned, reference may also be made to earlier pronouncements of the supreme court reported at (1995) 6 scc 309 r. chandevarappa and ors. vs. state of karnataka and ors., the court held as follows:- 11. the question then is whether the appellant has perfected his title by adverse possession. it is seen that a contention was ..... pleadings necessary to support the same as well as the onus and the burden of proof. in air 1997 sc 2930 d.n. venkatarayappa and anr. v. state of karnataka and ors., the supreme court held that in the absence of crucial pleadings, which constitute adverse possession and evidence to show that the petitioners have been in continuous and ..... a substitute for a plea. 32. also mention as to the real owner of the property must be specifically made in an adverse possession claim. (emphasis by me) 297. in karnataka board of wakf v. govt. of india : (2004) 10 scc 779 , this court observed as under: in the eye of the law, an owner would be deemed to .....

Nina Rajan Pillai and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... publicity it receives. 63.1 the supreme court, taking note of a letter petition by a prisoner in central jail, bangalore, issued several directions in rama murthy v. state of karnataka (1997) 2 scc 642 to improve the living conditions of inmates. the court delineated nine major problems "which afflict the system and which need immediate attention. these were : (1) overcrowding ..... to treat them as in- patients till they become normal without referring them back to the jail." 63.3 inter alia, the supreme court in rama murthy v. state of karnataka directed that recommendations of the seventy-eighth report of the law commission of india, 1980 on 'congestion of undertrial prisoners in jails' and the report of the all india committee .....

Subhash Chand Vs. S.M. Aggarwal and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1984CriLJ481; 25(1984)DLT52; 1984(6)DRJ160; 1984RLR111

..... this state ment goes to the court, it is not the same. then what is the reason that you are attaching so much importance to it how can it be preserved and saved shri aggarwal: such incidents of crimes in which women are burnt or burn themselves after marriage occur inside the house. no outsider can enter the house or stand ..... duly appointed by the union territory, we however, do not agree with his contention and in this regard we are supported by the view taken by a full bench of karnataka high court in s.n.nagaraja rao v. chikkachennappa and others (1981 cri. law journal p. 43) wherein it has been held :- 'article 215 of the constitution confers on every .....

Anita Garg Vs. M/S. Glencore GraIn Rotterdam B.V

Court : Delhi

..... law for judicial assistance in the conduct of the arbitration. even if the arbitrators have the power to order interim measures of protection, such as orders for the preservation and inspection of property, they are unlikely to have the power to enforce such orders - particularly if the property in question is in the possession of a ..... concerned, section 20 corresponds to section 2, albeit in a drastically condensed or compressed form. at first blush, therefore, the arbitration clauses have the effect of preserving the laws of india so far as contractual or substantive disputes are concerned and then go on to provide that procedural law pertaining to the conduct of the ..... of the icc rules was under scrutiny. we have perused it. it first reserves the right of the arbitral tribunal to pass interim or conservatory measures and secondly preserves, it seems to us, the powers of a judicial authority to do likewise. the argument before their lordships was that since the seat of arbitration was in .....

Dhirendra Brahmachari Vs. the Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : ILR1979Delhi65

..... it. the rule would not be attracted where there is only a possibility of prosecution. apart from that as observed by chandrachud, c. j. in the case of state of karnataka v. union of india and another, already noticed earlier, 'there are sensitive matters of public inportance which, if left to the normal investigational agencies, can create needless controversies and generate ..... , i.l.r. 32 cal 1 in making the above observations. the decision, of the nagpur high court has been noticed with approval by the supreme court in state of karnataka v. union' of india and another, : [1978]2scr1 . it has been further observed that the observations of the nagpur high court were quoted with approval in bajnandan sinha v. jyoti .....

Harminder Singh Koghar Vs. Ramnath Exports Private Ltd.

Court : Delhi

1. These two petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment as the impugned decision dated 16th September, 2013 passed by the learned ARC is identical except that in RC.REV. 392/2013 Ramnath Exports Pvt. Ltd.is the tenant of the petitioner for first and second floor and roof rights and in RC.REV. 394/2013 Bimla Devi and Ors.are the tenants in respect of basement, ground floor and garage of the petitioner in suit property bearing No.A-7, Green Park, New Delhi. 2. A brief exposition of facts is that the Petitioner filed two eviction petitions being Eviction No.11/09 and Eviction No.10/09 under Section 14(1)(e) DRC Act stating that he was the owner/landlord of the suit property which was built by his father Sardar Sarjeet Singh Koghar (since deceased), who had bought the piece of land from Shri Udhe Singh Gahunia vide sale deed dated 6th November, 1963 which was duly registered on 13th November, 1963. The suit property comprises of a building on A-7, Green Park Main, New Delhi which...