Skip to content


Main Sequence - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: main sequence Year: 1965 Page 1 of about 439 results (0.183 seconds)
May 12 1965 (HC)

Surinder Nath Uttam Vs. State of Punjab and anr.

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Decided on: May-12-1965

Reported in: AIR1965P& H386

..... the judgment this court has observed that having regard to the sequence of events which led to the reversion followed by the warning ..... the outset that the arguments before the full bench were confined mainly to matters arising out of orders made with regard to government ..... the outset that the arguments before the full bench were confined mainly to matters arising out of orders made with regard to .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 05 1965 (HC)

ibrahim Mohammed Issak Vs. Mackinnon Mackenzie and Co. (Private) Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Mar-05-1965

Reported in: 1965(67)BLJR735; [1966(12)FLR345]; (1965)ILLJ554Bom; 1966MhLJ220

by design it is necessary now to consider the two main questions which arise under s 3 of the workmen s

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 22 1965 (HC)

Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Ram Asrey Lal and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Nov-22-1965

Reported in: AIR1967All4

..... s case air 1960 sc 1203 merely expound the normal procedural sequence and should not be interpreted as excluding all possibility of variationfrom ..... state of u p have filed the present special appeals the main argument advanced by mr jagdish swarup on the appellant s ..... learned counsel for the respondents we are now left with the main question that arises for determination in this case viz whether the .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 29 1965 (HC)

Khem Karan and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Aug-29-1965

Reported in: AIR1966All255

..... accordance with the law 24 the land acquisition act provides for the sequence in which the proceedings have to be taken at first a notification ..... of the judgment at page 170 mudholkar j who spoke for the majority observed that the last contention of the petitioner was that the notification ..... is required for a public purpose this is the sequence in which the notifications have to be made the reason why .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 14 1965 (HC)

Panna Lal Vs. R.R. Sinha

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Apr-14-1965

Reported in: AIR1967All394; 1967CriLJ980

the order sheets faithfully record the events in their proper sequence as they had happened that day that is first there

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 08 1965 (HC)

Harris Mineral Supply Co. and ors. Vs. Salim M. Merchant and ors.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Decided on: Apr-08-1965

Reported in: AIR1966MP60; 1965MPLJ534

award to the workers the value of sick leave in maintaining efficiency and preventing prolonged sickness and absenteeism in the workers

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 08 1965 (HC)

Puttananjamma and anr. Vs. P.M. Channabasavanna and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Decided on: Sep-08-1965

Reported in: AIR1967Kant41; AIR1967Mys41

one and the same transaction is one on which a decision should rest upon the facts and circumstances of the case entitled so in a given case having regard to the sequence of events and other relevant factors if it would be

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 21 1965 (HC)

In Re: New Asiatic Insurance Co. Ltd.

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Decided on: Apr-21-1965

Reported in: [1967]37CompCas331(P& H)

in investment of funds which was only ancillary to its main object and its income since 1961 consisted mainly of dividends

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 22 1965 (HC)

Chentilnathan Chettiar Vs. Peri V. Sp. Manickam Chettiar

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Oct-22-1965

Reported in: AIR1966Mad426

jointly and management in turns in some settled order and sequence is only a permissible agreement between the trustees when there

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 27 1965 (SC)

Management Utkal Machinery Ltd. Vs. Workmen, Miss Shanti Patnaik

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Oct-27-1965

Reported in: AIR1966SC1051; [1966(12)FLR45]; (1966)ILLJ398SC; [1966]2SCR434

..... art 145 leads to the conclusion that the contemplated rules are mere machinery provisions the sequence is simple the formalities for entertaining certain types of appeal ale covered by art 145 ..... 1 c of the supreme court rules and also s 384 of the criminal procedure code the majority however held that in their application both the provisions shall be restricted by the criteria .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

  • << Prev.

Sign-up to get more results

Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.

Start Free Trial

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //