Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: nepali Sorted by: recent Year: 2008 Page 43 of about 424 results (0.006 seconds)

Wright Vs. Van Patten

Court : US Supreme Court

Wright v. Van Patten - 07-212 (2008) Wright v. Van Patten - 07-212 (2008) PER CURIAM WRIGHT V. VAN PATTEN 552 U. S. ____ (2008) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RANDALL WRIGHT, SHERIFF, SHAWANO COUNTY, WISCONSIN v. JOSEPH L. VAN PATTEN on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit No. 07212.Decided January 7, 2008 Per Curiam. The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that respondent Joseph Van Patten was entitled to relief under 28 U. S.C. 2254, reasoning that his lawyers assistance was presumptively ineffective owing to his participation in a plea hearing by speaker phone. Van Patten v. Deppisch, 434 F.3d 1038 (2006). We granted certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Carey v. Musladin , 549 U. S. ___ (2006). On remand, the Seventh Circuit adhered to its original decision, concluding that [n]othing in Musladin requires that our 2006 opinion be chang...

Marimuthu Vs. State by Inspector of Police

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2008CriLJ2011

V. Periya Karuppiah, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Ist Additional District Judge, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri made in S.C. No. 229 of 2004 dated 16.11.2005 convicting the accused/appellant under Sections 447 and 302 I.P.C. The accused was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to undergo R.I. for one year for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo R.I. for 15 days for the offence under Section 447 I.P.C.2. The case of the prosecution is as follows:(a) P.W.1 is the son of P.W.2 and Sambu, the deceased in the case. P.W.3 is the brother of P.W.2. Both the families of the accused and deceased belong to Aralkundi village.(b) One day prior to the date of occurrence i.e. on 21.1.2002, the accused indulged in a quarrel with the deceased Sambu as the deceased Sambu conveyed the conversation of the accused, with her, criticizing his son-in-law Anbazhangan regarding not taking ...

North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation by Its Managing Direct ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2009ACJ159; ILR2008KAR747; 2008(2)KarLJ746; 2008(1)KCCR295; 2008(2)AIRKarR507; 2008(4)CivilLJ132; 2008AIHC2021(Kar)(DB)

1. This appeal is listed today for hearing on admission, after notice to the respondents. Learned Counsel appearing on both the sides submit that the appeal may be taken up for final disposal. With the consent of the learned Counsel, the appeal is heard on merits and for final disposal.2. Respondents had filed claim petition under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the Act) claiming compensation from the appellant, on account of the death of one Sri. Rahul Dundappa Navale on 19-5-2005 due to the fatal injuries sustained by him in an accident, caused by the driver of the bus bearing registration No. KA 23/F-836, owned by the appellant. The claim petition was contested by the appellant. After enquiry, the Tribunal has allowed the petition and has passed the award for Rs. 4,12,500/- payable with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition, till realisation. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal.3. Learned Counsel appearing for the a...

Ramesh Kumar Sharma Vs. Smt. Akash Sharma

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR2008HP78,II(2008)DMC315,2008(1)ShimLC399

Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. This is the husband' s appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, dismissing the petition instituted by the husband against the wife on the ground of divorce under Section 13(1)(a) and (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. The parties were married on 1st March, 1979 at Pathankot. A male child was born to them on 27.2.1982. The appellant alleges that they lived together for 14 years and the respondent has withdrawn from the company of the appellant without any lawful excuse. She used to quarrel constantly and has not joined his company on the pretext that the appellant is having illicit sexual relations with his sister-in-law (Bhabhi) Smt. Sushma, which allegations have not been substantiated by her. His further allegation is that in 1981 when he was employed and posted at Indora the respondent used to visit his office and the residences of his superior officers using abusive language against him, ...