People V Nothaus - Judgment Search Results

Perez Vs. Campbell

Court: US Supreme Court

irresponsibility was thus brought to the attention of the department, and then to require suspension of their licenses."); People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210, 215-216, 363 P.2d 180, 183 (1961) ("The requirement of C.R.S. '53, 13-7-7, that the director

Ram Asrey Baiswar Vs. Subedar Pandey and anr.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1964All169

well as the consequences of the various constructions'.At page 516 a reference is made to the case of People v. Sutoliffe (7 N. Y. S. (2) 431) and the following quotation reproduced therefrom:'It is a rule of statutory

Epuru Sudhakar and anr. Vs. Govt. of A.P. and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR2006SC3385; JT2006(9)SC72; (2006)4MLJ1555(SC); 2006(10)SCALE98; (2006)8SCC161

the government in the interests of society and the discipline, education, and reformation of the person convicted. III- People v. Nowak 35, N.E. 2d 63, 387 III, II.(2) A pardon is granted on the theory that the convict

Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: (1982)3SCC24; [1983]1SCR145a

place in our criminal system. The New York Court of Appeals pointed out in a leading judgment in People v. Oliver N.Y. 2dd. 152:The punishment or treatment of offenders is directed toward one or more of three ends

Raymond Synthetics Ltd. and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1992SC847; [1992]73CompCas762(SC); JT1992(1)SC463; 1992(1)SCALE264; (1992)2SCC255; [1992]1SCR481

the relevant date. In view of the decisions that we have already referred to, particularly the passage from People v. Arguello as approved by the Supreme Court in Kesoram Industries' case and in Raman Iron Foundry's case, it

Lakshmi Charan Sen and ors. Vs. A.K.M. Hassan Uzzaman and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 1985(2)SCALE384; (1985)4SCC689; [1985]Supp1SCR493; 1986(1)LC104(SC)

accordance with the rules; and that, no notification be issued under Section 15(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 calling for election to the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, until the rolls were duly revised.2. Transferred … West Bengal Legislative Assembly, until the rolls were duly revised.2. Transferred Case No. 3 of 1982 is that very writ petition. It was withdrawn for hearing and final disposal to this Court by an order dated March

T.V. Vatheeswaran Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Overruled

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1983SC361B; 1983CriLJ481; (1983)IIMLJ39(SC); 1983(1)SCALE115; (1983)2SCC68; [1983]2SCR348

Brightman who gave the minority opinion, after referring to the British practice and Furman v. State of Georgia, People v. Chessman, People v. Anderson, Ediga Anumma v. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rajendra Prasad v. State of U.P, and

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Raman Iron Foundry Overruled

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1974SC1265; (1974)2SCC231; [1974]3SCR556; MANU/SC/0005/1974

money now or in future. The following passage from the judgment of the Supreme Court of California in People v. Arguello [1869] 37 Calif. 524 which was approved by this Court in Kesoram Industries v. Commissioner of Wealth

Raja Suriya Pal Singh Vs. the State of U.P. and anr.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: [1952]1SCR1056

the Constitution cannot prevail as against its letter. Dr. Ambedkar relied on the observations of Nelson J. in People v. Morris (13 Wend. 325), quoted in the footnote, at p. 357 of Cooley's Constitutional Limitations. The footnote states

All India Bank Employees' Association Vs. National Industrial Tribunal ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1962SC171; [1962]32CompCas414(SC); [1961(3)FLR307]; (1961)IILLJ385SC; [1962]3SCR269

two judgments of the Supreme Court of the United States : National Association for the advancement of colored people v. Alabama 2 Law. Ed. Sec 1488 and Bates v. Little Rock (4 Law. Ed. Second 480), in which