Skip to content
How to use Narrow results with filters
  1. Run a keyword search first to load the results page.
  2. Select Supreme Court, a High Court, or tribunal on the left.
  3. Optionally filter by decision year to focus on recent or historical cases.

Non U - Judgment Search Results

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial to open GPT-powered briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results - plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Nov 21 2016

State of U.P. and Ors Vs. All U.P. Consumer Protection Bar Ass.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Nov-21-2016

state and district level; conditions of eligibility for appointment of non-judicial members; administrative powers which have been or should be conferred … OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2740 OF2007STATE OF U P AND ORS .....APPELLANTS VERSUS ALL U P CONSUMER PROTECTION


May 18 2018

State of u.p. Through Principal Secretary Vs. All u.p. Consumer Protec ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: May-18-2018

provisions mentioned above. The model rules shall provide for the payment of salary, allowances and for the conditions of service of … INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.(s). 2740 OF2007STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH APPELLANT(s) PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS. VERSUS ALL U.P.


Aug 04 2017

U. Manjunath Rao Vs. U. Chandrashekar

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Aug-04-2017

soul to the judgment. Absence of analysis not only evinces non-application of mind but mummifies the core spirit of the judgment. … APPEAL NO.9951 OF2017(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.27646 of 2014) U. Manjunath Rao Appellant(s) Versus U. Chandrashekar & Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT


Turn these results into brief-ready notes

Feb 13 2004

U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. U.P. Rajya Setu Nigam ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Feb-13-2004

Reported in: AIR2005SC4067; 2004(5)ALD39(SC); 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)942; JT2004(2)SC440; (2004)IILLJ9SC; 2004(2)SCALE466; (2004)4SCC268; 2004(2)SLJ406(SC); (2004)2UPLBEC1567

except however, that they would not be entitled to any payment of arrears for the period during which they did not … roll employees. The respondents were working at the bridge construction unit of the appellant at Kanpur in various capacities. The terms


Apr 16 2003

State of U.P. and ors. Vs. U.P. Sales Tax Officers Grade Ii Associatio ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Apr-16-2003

Reported in: AIR2003SC2305; 2003(3)AWC2094(SC); [2003(97)FLR620]; JT2003(4)SC79; 2003(4)SCALE33; (2003)6SCC250; [2003]3SCR617; (2003)2UPLBEC1720

as mentioned above based on their engagement in developmental or non-developmental activities, was given a go-bye by the government. To the … Dharmadhikari, J.1. The State of Uttar Pradesh is in appeal against the judgment of the Division


May 05 2004

U.P. Co-operative Cane Unions Federations Vs. West U.P. Sugar Mills As ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: May-05-2004

Reported in: AIR2004SC3697; 2004(3)CTC590; (2004)5SCC430

in the mind of the Constitution Bench was the factual non fixation of the price by the State Government but not … ORDERSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH130. In C.A. No. 460 of 1997, the Division Bench


Nov 29 2004

U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. State of U.P. and anr.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Nov-29-2004

Reported in: I(2005)ACC51; AIR2005SC446; 2005(1)AWC220(SC); JT2004(10)SC173; 2004(10)SCALE28b; (2005)1SCC444

Allahabad High Court by which the scheme dated 13.2.1986 published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and the


May 02 2008

State of U.P. and anr. Vs. U.P. Rajya Khanij Vikas Nigam S.S. and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: May-02-2008

Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2833(SC); [2009(121)FLR424]; JT2008(6)SC489; 2008(9)SCALE1; 2008(8)Supreme453

global industrialization and liberalized economic policy introduced by the Government, non- resident Indians (NRIs) were attracted and several industrial entrepreneurs in … 1997. By the said order, the writ petition filed by Uttar Pradesh Rajya Khanij Vikas Nigam Sangharsh Samiti ('Samiti' for short)


Mar 09 2007

U.P. State Road Trasnport Corporation Vs. U.P. Rajya Sadak Parivahan K ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Mar-09-2007

Reported in: [2007(113)FLR343]; (2007)2LLJ546SC; 2007(4)SCALE302; (2007)10SCC758; 2007AIRSCW2406; 2007IILLJ546(SC)

against the impugned judgment and order dated 6.9.2005 of the Uttaranchal High Court in Writ Petition No. 774 of 2002. The


Oct 18 2011

U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. U.P. Power Corpn. Ltd.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Oct-18-2011

Reported in: (2011)10SCC223; 2011AIRSCW6299; 2012(2)SCJ588

order dated 3.2.2006, that it had been held that the payment of supervision charges at the rate of 5% (under the … 1. The appellant herein, the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (hereinafter referred to as, the


  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

Try AI Brief & Semantic Search - 7 days free


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial