Multiple - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: multiple Year: 1977 Page 1 of about 146 results (0.015 seconds)Shivmanik Dattatraya Shivangikar Vs. Latur Municipal Council
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR457; 1978MhLJ826
section 406 of the act it is not necessary to multiply the authorities because the above three authorities dealing with the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBir Singh and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Aug-18-1977
Reported in: AIR1978SC59; 1978CriLJ177a; (1977)4SCC420
prosecution to examine each and every witness so as to multiply witnesses and burden the record this rule however does not
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Polychem Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1977
Reported in: [1977]39STC315(Bom)
kania j 1 this is a reference under section 61 1 of the bombay sales tax act 1959 hereinafter referred...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Wealth-tax, Gujarat-iii Vs. Smt. Arundhati Balkrishna ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-06-1977
Reported in: [1977]108ITR78(Guj)
the present case are concerned it is not necessary to multiply the decisions of the supreme court or other high courts
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Wealth-tax, Gujarat-iii Vs. Smt. Arundhati Balkrishna ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-06-1977
Reported in: [1977]108ITR79(Guj)
present case are concerned 15 it is not necessary to multiply the decisions of the supreme court or other high courts
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTManohar Singh and ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1977
Reported in: 14(1978)DLT37; ILR1978Delhi53
1976 1 f a c 139 it is needless to multiply the further citations on this question this action taken by
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSeth R. Dalmia Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi, New Delhi
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Sep-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1977SC2394; [1978]48CompCas1(SC); [1977]110ITR644(SC); (1977)4SCC329; [1978]1SCR537; 1977(9)LC642(SC)
s case supra it is not necessary for us to multiply authorities summarising therefore the facts of the present case the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState of Karnataka Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Nov-08-1977
Reported in: AIR1978SC68; (1977)4SCC608; [1978]2SCR1
the private citizen p 4 it is not necessary to multiply the quotations in no sense the impugned law is a
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSangram Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-30-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN379
was written by him the prosecution is not bound to multiply evidence in proof of a particular fact consequently i am
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRev. Stainislaus Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Jan-17-1977
Reported in: AIR1977SC908; 43(1977)CLT382(SC); 1977CriLJ551; (1977)1SCC677; [1977]2SCR611; 1977(9)LC158(SC)
the expression propagate has a number of meanings including to multiply specimens of a plant animal disease etc by any process
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>
Sign-up to get more results
Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.
Start Free Trial