Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka traffic control act 1960 section 7 signals Sorted by: old Court: orissa Page 6 of about 75 results (0.971 seconds)

Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. Vs. Board of Trustees, Paradeep Port Trust

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR2009Ori114

..... oil pipeline on the conveyor gallery of the petitioner.7. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is only after a period of three years that the traffic manager of paradeep port trust issued a letter dated 23-5-2006 to paradeep phosphates ltd. alleging that the petitioner-company had without taking permission from the ..... petitioner-company in favour of m/s. zuari maroc phosphates ltd. by virtue of the said share purchase agreement dated 28-2-2002 where by the management and control of the petitioner-company was handed over to m/s. zuari maroc phosphates ltd.the petitioner-company needed to import raw materials, machineries and other equipments for ..... that requires registration, while the creation of a new easement does not involve transfer of ownership in immovable properties as contemplated under section 54 of the t.p. act and hence does not require registration.we are of the considered view that this issue also does not arises for our consideration in the facts of the present .....

Sundargarh Citizen's Forum Vs. Orissa State Road Transport Corporation ...

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 2009(I)OLR361

..... society. it is mere and proper as also in the interest of the parties that the entire question is taken into account at this stage.10. in state of karnataka and anr. v. all india manufacturers organisation and ors. : air2006sc1846 , the issue was reconsidered and the court observed as under:as a matter of fact, in ..... the user of the plot for commercial purposes came to be filed and was dismissed by the high court. in the said writ petition certain provisions of development control rules for change of user of the plot to commercial purpose was not raised at all. subsequently, another writ petition was filed for the same purpose challenging ..... passed certain orders in the writ petition and disposed of the same. subsequently, another writ petition was filed giving reference to certain provisions of the forest (conservation) act, 1980, which had not been referred to in the earlier case. the court rejected the contention of applicability of principle of res judicata observing as under:.at the .....

Jogeswar Bagh Vs. Registrar (Admn.) Orissa High Court and 3 ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : (2009)107CALLT332(NULL)

..... on the face of the record. (vide state of u.p. & os. v. renusagar power co. and ors. : air1988sc1737 ); karnataka state industrial investment and development corporation ltd., v. cavalet india ltd. : (2005)4scc456 ; maharashtra state seeds corporation ltd., v. hari ..... conducted after issue of charge-sheet, unless it is to be relied upon in regular inquiry, (vide amlendu ghosh v. district traffic superintendent, north-eastern railway, katiyar : (1960)iillj61sc ; champak lal chiman lal shah v. union of india : (1964) ..... to the effect that matters not governed by the rules, 1969 shall be governed by the orissa civil services (classification, control & appeal) rules, 1962 (hereinafter called the rules, 1962). so far as holding disciplinary proceedings is concerned, rule 15 ..... to promote purposes alien to the letter or to the spirit of the legislation that gives it power to act, and must not act arbitrarily or capriciously.15. in smt. shalini soni v. union of india : 1980crilj1487 , the supreme .....

Sudhansu Sekhar Gantayat Vs. State of Orissa and anr.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : (2009)107CALLT350(NULL)

..... , at the most, it can be held that earlier a preliminary enquiry was conducted mainly on two allegations.9. the constitution bench of supreme court in amlendu ghosh v. district traffic superintendent, north-eastern railway, katiyar : (1960)iillj61sc held that a preliminary enquiry held in respect of a particular instance is for the purpose of finding a particular fact and prima ..... was not senior superior to the petitioner. more so, he has merely been warned to mend his ways. undoubtedly, warning is not a punishment under the orissa civil services (classification, control & appeal) rules, 1962. thus by no stretch of imagination, it can be held that any inquiry had earlier been conducted and concluded against the petitioner on any of the charges .....

Union of India (Uoi) and Two ors. Vs. Rabindra Behera and anr.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 107(2009)CLT556

..... of a criminal case are very different from those of a departmental disciplinary proceeding and an order of acquittal, therefore, cannot conclude the departmental proceeding.7. in state of karnataka and anr. v. t. venkataramanappa : (1997)illj716sc ; and senior superintendent of post offices v. a. gopalan : (1999)illj1313sc , the apex court held ..... employee was arrested and remained in judicial custody for more than 48 hours, in view of the provisions of rule 10 of the central civil services (classification control & appeal) rules, 1965, he was put under suspension vide order dated 22.1.1987. the said opposite party faced the criminal trial, however, stood ..... wholesale stores ltd. and ors. v. secretary, sahakari noukarara sangha and ors. : (2000)iillj1395sc ; karnataka state road transport corporation v. b.s. hullikatty : (2001)illj725sc ; regional manager, r.s.r.t.c. v. ghanshyam sharma : (2002)illj234sc ; divisional controller n.e.k.r.t.c. v. h. amaresh : (2006)iiillj232sc ; and u.p.s .....

Ardhu ChendreyA. Vs. State of OrissA.

Court : Orissa

..... in criminal trials over the actions taken by the investigating officers. criminal justice cannot be made casualty for the wrongs committed by the investigating officer in the case. (state of karnataka v. k.yarappa reddy; 2000 sar (cri) 37) = (1999) 8 scc 715 = air 2000 sc 185.29. thus, from the above evidence, the learned ..... sentencing discretion is a policy matter which belongs to the sphere of the legislation. when the parliament has a matter of sound legislation already did not deliberately restrict, control or standardise, the sentence discretion any further than that is encompassed by the board contours delineated in section 354(3) of the code, the court would not ..... any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.the principles guiding cases based only on circumstantial evidence also came up for consideration before the supreme court in sharad .....

Orissa Mining Corporation Limited Vs. State of Orissa

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 2010(I)OLR756

..... release of the property in. question. on the other hand, the special law providing the special forum for such release, namely, section 57 of the orissa forest act would apply and it would be the forest officer, who alone would be competent to release the property on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit and proper. ..... .l.t. 371 : 1990 (i) olr 481, wherein this court has held that if the seizure is made under the provisions of section 56 of the forest act and the property seized is produced before the divisional forest officer for initiation of a proceeding of confiscation, then merely because the factum of seizure is reported to the magistrate ..... of the petitioners is that the petitioner orissa mining corporation ltd. is a wholly owned company of the government of orissa duly incorporated under the provisions of the companies act, 1956, having its registered office at omc house, bhubaneswar. it is engaged in the business of mining of different kinds of ores and minerals. out of various .....

Sri Jeyaram Educational Trust and ors. Vs. A.G. Syed Mohideen and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 2010(I)OLR838

..... have jurisdiction to entertain suits under that section, neither the provisions of sections 15 to 20 of the code nor the provisions of section 12 of the civil courts act will apply to such suits. section 92 is a self contained provision, and conferment of jurisdiction in regard to suits under that section does not depend upon the ..... court empowered by the state government,'or'may institute a suit in the court notified by the state government.'9. the provisions of section 12 of the civil courts act specifying the pecuniary limits of district courts and sub-ordinate courts, is subject to the provisions of the code of civil procedure. in view of the express provisions ..... the subject- matter of which exceeds the pecuniary limits (if any) of its ordinary jurisdiction.4.4) section 10 of the tamil nadu civil courts act, 1873 (for short 'civil courts act') empowers the state government to fix, and from time to time vary, the local limits of the jurisdiction of any district court or sub-ordinate judge .....

Anupama Behera and ors. Vs. Divisional Manager, L.i.C. of India and an ...

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 2010(I)OLR534

..... contract of life insurance being one of utmost good faith and the probable expectancy or duration of the life of policyholder being an important element in it, the controlling factor in the construction of terms 'sickness, ailment or injury' in the application by insured for revival of his lapsed insurance policy must necessarily be the ..... great bearing on the contract of insurance, if discovered, may lead to the policy being vitiated in law and therefore the proposal can be repudiated if a fraudulent act has been discovered. in the said case, the deceased insured while submitting the proposal form had not disclosed that he had undergone an operation for adenoma thyroid. ..... which impair the constitution of the insured or interrupt the performance of vital functions, xxx xxx xxx.11. considering the effect of section 45 of the insurance act and whether the policy holder had made an inaccurate or false statement on a material matter or suppressed facts which it was material to disclose and it .....

P. Prabhakar Verma Vs. Lic of India and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 110(2010)CLT49

..... , on the other hand, took pain to place the orders passed by the authorities before this court & submitted that perusal of the same would reveal that the petitioner had not acted bonafidely inasmuch as though opportunity was given to him to show cause, he failed to avail the same. it is further submitted that in consonance with the regulation, 1960 if .....