Others V State - Judgment Search Results

Saraswat Co-op. Bank Employees Union Vs. V. State of Maharashtra and o ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1996(5)BomCR122; [1996(74)FLR1945]; (1997)ILLJ232Bom; 1996(2)MhLj10

prepared on March 8, 1994. The learned counsel for petitioner submits that this action of the respondent is vitiated by non application of mind and hence illegal. Be that as it may, we do not propose to … reminding the petitioner that they have not filed the returns and also calling for the explanation. It also stated that if the explanation is not filed within two months the registration of the Petitioner Union will be

Sharadchandra Vinayak Dongre, and Others Etc. Vs. V. State of Maharash ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1991CriLJ3329

the parties at length, I had passed the following operative order on 1st February 1990 :- 'Heard Mr. V. R. Manohar with Mr. Rahimatoola and Mr. S. V. Manohar for the Petitioners and Mr. Gangakhedkar, A.P.P. for … Manohar with Mr. Rahimatoola and Mr. S. V. Manohar for the Petitioners and Mr. Gangakhedkar, A.P.P. for the State-Respondent. For reasons stated in the accompanying judgment, the Rule is made absolute to the extent that the order

M. Vs. Chacko V. State of Madras.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [1968]70ITR801(Mad)

Matched in: Parties M. Vs. Chacko V. State of Madras.

Om NaraIn Agarwal and Others Vs. Nagar Palika, Shahjahanpur and Others ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1993SC1440; JT1993(4)SC483; 1993(1)SCALE663; (1993)2SCC242; [1993]2SCR34; (1993)2UPLBEC817

the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 1067 of 1991 Prem Kumar Balmiki v. State of U.P. by order dated 13.11.1991 held that the fourth proviso to Section 9 of the Act was … the Allahabad High Court sitting at Allahabad in Writ Petition No. 11114 of 1990 Dr. Smt. Rama Mishra v. State of U.P. by order dated 9.12.1991 held that the fourth proviso to Section 9 of the Act was

Morvi Municipality Vs. State of Gujarat and ors. (Ca No. 1374 of 1974) ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: (1993)112CTR(SC)448

as follows :'99. Taxes which may be imposed. -(1) Subject to any general or special orders which the State Government may make in this behalf and the provisions of ss. 101 and 102, a Municipality may impose … tax-payers of the appellant-Morvi Municipality (the Municipality) had filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the validity of the rules made by it for the levy of consolidated property tax on lands and buildings and

M/S. Vs. Gunaviah Naidu and Sons Etc. V. State of Tamil Nadu and anr. ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: (1977)6CTR(SC)14

7(b) of the Second Schedule to the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the State Act.)2. The appellants are dealers in hides and skins. The appellants purchase raw hides and skins locally as … special leave are against the judgment of Madras High Court whereby that court repelled the challenge to the validity of items 7(a) and 7(b) of the Second Schedule to the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter

M/S. Balabhagas Hulaschand Vs. State of OrissA. (Civil Appeals Nos. 44 ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: (1976)5CTR(SC)175

The other five appeals are by the same firm in respect of the sales tax levied by the State of Orissa for the quarters ending December, 1959, March, 1960 and December, 1960 to June, 1961, decided by … previous judgment, which is the subject-matter of the six appeals mentioned above and held that the levy was valid. The points of law arising in these appeals also are identical to the points arising in the other

1. Ansi Devi V. State of Jandk; and ors. Vs. State of J and K and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

JAMMU. OWP No. 654 OF 200.AND OWP No. 228 OF 200.AND OWP No. 229 OF 200.1. Ansi Devi v. State of J&K and ors.2. Kailash v. State of J&K and ors.3. Balo v. State of J&K and ors.4. … No. 228 OF 200.AND OWP No. 229 OF 200.1. Ansi Devi v. State of J&K and ors.2. Kailash v. State of J&K and ors.3. Balo v. State of J&K and ors.4. Muni v. State of J&K and ors.5.

Lajja Ram and ors. V. State of Haryana Vs. Unknown

Court: Punjab and Haryana

for the applicant/appellant No.1- Lajja Ram. Mr.H.S.Deol, Addl. A.G., Haryana. Mr.Sanjay Jain, Advocate for the complainant. *** Learned State counsel has filed affidavit of Sh. Rattan Singh, Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala mentioning the period of imprisonment undergone … Kumar and Malkiat Singh (appellants in CRA not D-477- DB of 2012).Their sentences of imprisonment have been suspended vide order dated 26.9.2012 (Annexure P2) passed in CRM No.34317 of 2012 in (202) CRM No.72418 of 2012 in

Jasvir Kaur @ Gogi V. State of Punjab Vs. Unknown

Court: Punjab and Haryana

(202) CRM No.62062 of 2012 in [1].CRA not D-25-DB of 2011 Jasvir Kaur @ Gogi v. State of Punjab Present : Mr.Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate for the applicant/appellant. Mr.S.S.Dhaliwal, Addl. A.G., Punjab. *** Learned State counsel … as on 31.1.2013. This includes imprisonment of more than two years after conviction. In the case of Dharampal v. State of Haryana, 1999 (4) RCR (Crl.) 600 it was held by a Division Bench of this Court that