Remove - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: remove Year: 1983 Page 1 of about 913 results (0.024 seconds)Lanka Sharma Vs. Rajendra Singh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-22-1983
Reported in: II(1984)ACC62
p a choudhary j 1 this appeal is filed by the claimant in o p no 346 of 1978 on...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTKrishnan Nair Sreedharan Nair Vs. Oommoommen Abraham
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Mar-17-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Ker164
k s paripoornan j 1 the defendant in o s 193 of 1977 of the munsiff s court mavalikkara is...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTB.K. Shrestha Vs. Commissioner of Police
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-29-1983
Reported in: 25(1984)DLT146
r n aggarwal j 1 on 6th june 1980 the golden tobacco company limited and sikkim tobacco pvt ltd registered...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMahabir Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-1983
Reported in: (1984)(16)ELT477TriDel
..... of other high courts regarding the interpretation of the terms removed and removal with reference to rules 9 and 49 of the ..... the first ground namely that captive consumption would not constitute removal shri khaitan has advanced a number of interesting arguments as ..... fabrics they contended that since none of these articles was removed from the factory premises but was used for captive consumption .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTFranchise Tax Bd. Vs. Construction Laborers
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-24-1983
..... statutes federal courts do not have original jurisdiction nor do they acquire jurisdiction on removal when a federal question is presented by a complaint for a state declaratory judgment ..... judgment actions as well if federal district courts could take jurisdiction either originally or by removal of state declaratory judgment claims raising questions of federal law without regard to the .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState of Gujarat Vs. Kishorchandra Ajitrai Chhaya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-03-1983
Reported in: 1985CriLJ392
..... contended on behalf of the respondents the legislature has deliberately departed from the expression removable from office employed in section 48 and instead used an innocent expression discontinuance in ..... this contention is absolutely misconceived if we accept this contention the procedure prescribed for removing the chief officer under section 48 would be frustrated when the legislature has laid .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTShankar Shetteppa Chougule Vs. Shivaputra Shankarappa Shairakoli
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-08-1983
..... want of confidence and therefore they being not public servants not removable from office save by or with the sanction of the ..... his duties as a councillor provided that no councillor shall be removed except after being afforded an opportunity for submitting an explanation 2 ..... government while under section 41 of the act the government may remove the councillor elected or appointed under the act on the .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTWatt Vs. Western Nuclear, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-06-1983
..... then notified respondent and later determined after a hearing that the removal of the gravel constituted a trespass in violation of a ..... blm served western nuclear with a notice that the extraction and removal of the gravel constituted a trespass against the united states ..... with by the reservation of minerals and the prospecting for a removal of same from the land based on similar concerns the .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRamesh Bhauraoji and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-23-1983
Reported in: II(1984)ACC40
..... meeting of the corporation provided that no member nominated by the central government shall be removed from office without the concurrence of that government it would appear that under old section ..... 8 the state government was empowered to remove chairman or member in the two contingencies specified therein 5 the amendment act introduced certain .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRaipur Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC1004DTri(Delhi)
..... attracts duty therefore if on the date when the goods are removed from the place of manufacture they are specified in the central ..... excise tariff schedule they cannot be removed unless duty is paid on them even though such goods may ..... case is whether duty on the subject yarn which admittedly was removed from the place of its manufacture within the factory to another .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>
Sign-up to get more results
Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.
Start Free Trial