Personable - Judgment Search Results

Bush Vs. Person

Court: US Supreme Court

Bush v. Person - 59 U.S. 82 (1855) U.S. Supreme Court Bush v.

Estate of Late S.V. Rajammal (by Accountable Person S.V. Venkatasubbu) ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [1992]197ITR55(Mad)

to as 'the Act'), at the instance of the accountable person and the Controller of Estate Duty, Tamil Nadu, respectively, the

Personal Manager, Sbi and anr. Vs. Krishna Grameena Bank Employees Uni ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 2008(1)KarLJ62; (2008)ILLJ894SC; 2007(3)SCALE575; 2007AIRSCW7669; 2008–I-LLJ-894; 2008LabIC474; 2007(8)Supreme675; 2008(2)KLJ62; 2008(1)AIRKarR330

Arijit Pasayat, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court...

The Director (Personal), Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. Vs. R. Senat ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR2007Mad118; [2007]135CompCas329(Mad); (2007)1CompLJ272(Mad); 2007(208)ELT3(Mad); (2007)1MLJ1; [2007]75SCL20(Mad)

the plaintiff. In Ex.A.1 to A3 the name of the person is left blank. Ex.A.4 is related to a person born

Tainwala Personal Care Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Royal Sundaram Alliance ...

Court: Mumbai

Oral Judgment: 1. This application arises under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In pursuance of a...

Personal Interview Total Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Court: Punjab and Haryana

for ready reference:- “Total Marks of the Viva-voce:100. Marks 1. Personal Achievements 40 marks a) Academic Qualifications: i) B.Tech. 10 marks

Personal Interview Total Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Court: Punjab and Haryana

for ready reference:- “Total Marks of the Viva-voce:100. Marks 1. Personal Achievements 40 marks a) Academic Qualifications: i) B.Tech. 10 marks

a Person Aggrieved by an Order of Promoting a Vs. State of Punjab and ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

The observations of Hon'ble Apex Court are as under:- "A person aggrieved by an order of promoting a junior over his

“a Person Aggrieved by an Order of Promoting a Vs. State of Punjab a ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

be relevant and the same are in the following terMs.“A person aggrieved by an order of promoting a junior over his

“sports Person (Punjab) Vs. State of Punjab and Others --respondents

Court: Punjab and Haryana

of Junior Engineer (Electrical) had been reserved for the S.C.Sports Person. To claim benefit of such reservation, it was clearly stipulated