Multiple - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: multiple Year: 1988 Page 1 of about 255 results (0.017 seconds)B.V. Danny Mao Vs. State of Nagaland
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-17-1988
was further held it is not necessary for us to multiply authorities on this point as this question now stands concluded
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTB.B. Jewellers Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-1988
Reported in: (1988)(16)ECC181
i do not think that there is any necessity to multiply the case law in this regard what is to be
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThayammal Vs. K. Subramaniam
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-12-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Mad317
several months and payment thereof it is not necessary to multiply the authorities on this aspect of the matter as found
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAshwani Kumar Vs. Banwari Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-01-1988
Reported in: AIR1990Raj3
in the original pleading 15 it is unnecessary to further multiply the decisions on the point i am therefore of the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTGopalakrishnan Nair Vs. thembatty Ramani
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Dec-08-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Ker331
shantabai air 1982 bom 231 we do not propose to multiply authorities on this aspect 12 we do not see any
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTK.R. Visalakshi and ors. Vs. Pookodan Hamza and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-29-1988
Reported in: I(1989)ACC30; AIR1989Ker192
it is joint and several we do not propose to multiply authority on this point we are fairly clear that a
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe Bombay Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ballarpur Industries Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-21-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Delhi77; 35(1988)DLT64; 1988RLR340
to sound phonetically similar 14 it is not necessary to multiply the instances where courts have held that words though spelt
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. Madhya Pradesh Electricity B ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Sep-12-1988
Reported in: AIR1989SC788; (1988)3CompLJ197(SC); JT1988(4)SC737; 1988(2)SCALE1039; 1989Supp(2)SCC52; [1988]Supp2SCR978
the 1910 act we do not consider it necessary to multiply the decisions as there does not appear to be any
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRamesh Birch and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: May-25-1988
Reported in: AIR1988P& H281
a manner as possible it is not necessary to further multiply except to state that in several decisions the supreme court
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTTukuna Alias Satyajit Panda Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-28-1988
Reported in: 1989CriLJ364
of the act it is not necessary for us to multiply authorities on the point and on the ratio of the
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