Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka prohibition act 1961 section 25 licence for tapping for neera Court: delhi Page 5 of about 57 results (0.143 seconds)

Safmarine Container Lines N.V. Vs. M/S Amita Enterprises and anr

Court : Delhi

..... commission. the honble supreme court has consistently taken the view that the jurisdiction of the consumer forum should not be curtailed unless there is an express provision prohibiting the consumer forum from taking up the matter which falls within the jurisdiction of civil courts. in the instant case, the plaintiff has not been able ..... the honble supreme court has consistently taken the view that the jurisdiction of the consumer forum should not be curtailed unless there is an express provision prohibiting the consumer forum from taking up the matter which falls within the jurisdiction of the civil court; and in the instant case the plaintiff has not ..... disposal of consumer disputes and an attempt has been made to remove the existing evils of the ordinary court system. the act being a beneficial legislation should receive a liberal construction. in state of karnataka v. vishwabharathi house building coop. society air 200.sc 1043.the court speaking on the jurisdiction of the consumer fora .....

State Vs. Shaqila and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2000(55)DRJ713

..... evidence of such events may also be said to be dependent. in a criminal case, different pieces of evidence directed to establishing that the defendant did the prohibited act with the specified state of mind are generally dependent. a juror may feel doubt whether to credit an alleged confession, and doubt whether to infer guilt from ..... of the apex court in ananta bhularan kulkami v. state of maharashtra, : 1992crilj3997 also throws considerable light on the aspect. the apex court reversed judgment of the karnataka high court, where the accused involved in the case was acquitted on the ground that circumstances did not show complete chain of circumstances to warrant conclusion of guilt. ..... may take notice of few cases which involved innocent children, such as al-lauddin v. state of bihar air 1988 sc 456 and sidagaida v. state of karnataka air 1981 sc 784 wherein infants were involved. the mitigating circumstances were held to be that the crime was not committed for personal gain. on a close .....

Pradeep Mehta Vs. State and anr.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2006(91)DRJ384

..... deemed to have caused her death.explanation -- for the purpose of this sub-section, 'dowry' shall have the same meaning as in section 2 of the dowry prohibition act, 1961 (28 of 1961).(2) whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life ..... high court's view in the impugned order that permissible period of filing of challan is 90 days is the correct view. contrary view expressed by jharkhand, delhi and karnataka high courts is not correct. himachal pradesh, rajasthan and punjab and haryana high courts taking the view 90 days is the period have expressed the correct view....15. from ..... cited some judgments of hon'ble supreme court reported as : air 1995 sc 785, 2000 scc(crl.) 1326, 1995 scc(crl.) 1051, : (1984) 2 scc 500 and air 1961 sc and a judgment of rajasthan high court reported as : 1982 crl.l.j. 2319.9. learned counsel also submitted that in fact it has been the case of the .....

Ramesh Kr. Dogra Vs. P.O. Labour Court-i and anr.

Court : Delhi

..... merely on the ground that his work and conduct was not found satisfactory is not stigmatic. reliance was also placed on h f sangati vs. rg high court of karnataka & ors. 2001 89 flr231sc wherein it was held that a probationer could be discharged from services, inter alia, on account of unsuitability for the service.9. ..... respondent alleged that it was not an industry within the meaning of the act. it was stated that in terms of appointment letter the petitioner was put on probation for 160 working days not including holidays and sundays. petitioner had not ..... any notice was served on the petitioner nor any notice pay in lieu of notice period was tendered, thus, section 25-f of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (for short, the act) was violated rendering the termination illegal. it was prayed that petitioner be reinstated with full back wages and continuity of service.4. in written statement, .....

Competition Commission of India and Anr vs.oriental Rubber Industries ...

Court : Delhi

..... that the right to practice under section 30 of the advocates act, 1961 was not an unqualified right and it may be restricted by law for the time being in force. 10. turning to the provisions of the competition act, learned senior counsel contended that the act impliedly prohibits advocates from appearing before the dg in as much as section ..... authority or person before whom such advocate is by or under any law for the time being in force entitled to practice. 18. interpreting section 30 of the act, the karnataka high court in m/s. kothari industrial corporation limited v. the coffee board, 1999 (5) kar lj302 held: the right of an advocate to practise ..... circumscribed by the right of the advocate to appear before such court, tribunal, authority or person. if the advocate has in terms of section 30 of the advocates act, 1961, the right to practise before any court, tribunal, authority or person, it would necessarily mean that a litigant before any such court, tribunal, authority or person .....

State (G.N.C.T) of Delhi Vs. Vijay Kumar and Other

Court : Delhi

..... is normally understood. the evidence adduced by the prosecution does not, therefore, show that any demand for dowry as defined in section 2 of the dowry prohibition act was made by the appellants as what was allegedly asked for was some money for meeting domestic expenses and for purchasing manure. since an essential ingredient of ..... harjit singh v. state of punjab : (2006) 1 scc463 biswajit haider @ babu haider and ors. v. state of west bengal : (2008) 1 scc202and narayanamurthy v. state of karnataka and anr. : (2008) 16 scc512 9. further, to sustain the conviction under section 304b indian penal code, the following essential ingredients are to be established: (i) the death ..... death is caused in connection with dowry demand, section 113-b of the evidence act also comes into play. both these sections 304-b indian penal code and section 113-b of the evidence act were inserted by the dowry prohibition (amendment) act 43 of 1986 with a view to combat the increasing menace of dowry deaths. .....

Common Cause Vs. The Union of India

Court : Delhi

..... as a teacher and distracts the attention and energy from the task assigned. (ii). prof. m. gurunath vs. state of karnataka manu/ka/0194/2003 negating a challenge to the rule prohibiting teachers in government colleges from giving private tuitions, on the ground of being violative of article 19(1)(a) of the constitution of ..... vs. state of west bengal (1993) 3 scc 723 where, in the context of challenge to the west bengal state health service act, 1990 and the west bengal health service rules, 1993 prohibiting private practice altogether when a doctor is posted to the health centers, rural hospitals and teaching hospitals, it was held that judicial notice ..... on the part of the legislature were resulting in the chairpersons / members of the tribunals / statutory authorities / commissions, even though employed full time, continuing to act as arbitrators to the prejudice and detriment of the full time office held by them; the counsel for the petitioner called upon this court to fill the vacuum. .....

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-3 vs.ppc Business and Products ...

Court : Delhi

..... 23 coram: justice s.muralidhar justice prathiba m. singh % judgment1707.2017 dr. s. muralidhar 1.these appeals by the revenue under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 ( the act ) arise out of similar set of facts involving similar questions of law and are accordingly disposed of by this common judgment.2. in five of these appeals i. ..... the search. if for any reason the authorised officer wants to search the premises again, it could be done by obtaining a fresh authorisation. there is no prohibition in respect of the same premises. it is open to the empowered authority the authorisation is issued once, the authorised officer cannot go on visiting the premises under ..... assessment up to 31st december, 2009. the decision in c ramaiah reddy 25.1 in this context, the court would like to refer to the decision of the karnataka high court in c. ramaiah reddy v. assistant commissioner of income tax (2011) 339 itr201(kar.) where these very provisions were examined in extenso. there the court .....

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-3 vs.surya Vinayak Industires L ...

Court : Delhi

..... 23 coram: justice s.muralidhar justice prathiba m. singh % judgment1707.2017 dr. s. muralidhar 1.these appeals by the revenue under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 ( the act ) arise out of similar set of facts involving similar questions of law and are accordingly disposed of by this common judgment.2. in five of these appeals i. ..... the search. if for any reason the authorised officer wants to search the premises again, it could be done by obtaining a fresh authorisation. there is no prohibition in respect of the same premises. it is open to the empowered authority the authorisation is issued once, the authorised officer cannot go on visiting the premises under ..... assessment up to 31st december, 2009. the decision in c ramaiah reddy 25.1 in this context, the court would like to refer to the decision of the karnataka high court in c. ramaiah reddy v. assistant commissioner of income tax (2011) 339 itr201(kar.) where these very provisions were examined in extenso. there the court .....

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-3 vs.j.h. Business India Pvt. L ...

Court : Delhi

..... 23 coram: justice s.muralidhar justice prathiba m. singh % judgment1707.2017 dr. s. muralidhar 1.these appeals by the revenue under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 ( the act ) arise out of similar set of facts involving similar questions of law and are accordingly disposed of by this common judgment.2. in five of these appeals i. ..... the search. if for any reason the authorised officer wants to search the premises again, it could be done by obtaining a fresh authorisation. there is no prohibition in respect of the same premises. it is open to the empowered authority the authorisation is issued once, the authorised officer cannot go on visiting the premises under ..... assessment up to 31st december, 2009. the decision in c ramaiah reddy 25.1 in this context, the court would like to refer to the decision of the karnataka high court in c. ramaiah reddy v. assistant commissioner of income tax (2011) 339 itr201(kar.) where these very provisions were examined in extenso. there the court .....