Remove - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: remove Year: 1987 Page 1 of about 1,177 results (0.093 seconds)Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and o ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: May-06-1987
Reported in: AIR1987SC1727; 65(1988)CLT1(SC); JT1987(2)SC362; 1987(1)SCALE1213; (1987)3SCC189; [1987]3SCR265; 1987(2)LC297(SC)
1 m s indian metals and ferro b alloys ltd the petitioner in writ petition no 1753 of 1986 and...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBharath Motor Service and Etc. Vs. the Regional Transport Officer and ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Kant190; 1987(3)KarLJ288
order1 in all these petitions under arts 226 and 227 of the constitution the petitioners have sought for quashing the...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTVasudeo Prasad Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-23-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN556
m b sharma j 1 the question involved in the present case is as to whether after withdrawal of the...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe Coimbatore Athar Jamath, an Association Registered Under the Socie ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-16-1987
Reported in: (1987)2MLJ438
srinivasan j 1 the plaintiff in the suit is the appellant before me there is a long history to this...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAsian Paints (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-14-1987
Reported in: (1988)(15)ECC189
..... the insinuation of the learned departmental representative that the appellants removed the goods clandestinely we find that there is a lot ..... with the abovesaid provisions there was no charge of clandestine removal in the show cause notice issued to the appellants there ..... they took credit were not intended to be utilised they removed the finished products without payment of appropriate duty there is .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTGray Vs. Mississippi
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-18-1987
..... some degree of doubt about the death penalty the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to remove those eight panel members when venire member bounds although initially somewhat confused in her ..... exclude for cause jurors from capital juries does not extend beyond its interest in removing those jurors who would frustrate the state s legitimate interest in administering constitutional capital .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMetropolitan Life Ins. Co. Vs. Taylor
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-06-1987
..... in state court of which the federal district courts have original jurisdiction may be removed by the defendant to the appropriate federal district court petitioner insurer underwrites an erisa ..... reimplementation of his benefits and for related common law contract and tort claims but petitioners removed the suit to federal court alleging federal question jurisdiction over the disability claim by .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCaterpillar, Inc. Vs. Williams
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-09-1987
..... federal substantive labor law merged into and superseded by the collective bargaining agreements petition for removal app a 36 respondents denied that they alleged any federal claim and immediately sought remand ..... only state court actions that originally could have been filed in federal court may be removed to federal court by the defendant footnote 5 absent diversity of citizenship federal question .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM.D. Juvekar Vs. Modern Bakeries (India) Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: (1987)2GLR1375; (1988)ILLJ433Guj
..... enquiry report the divisional operating superintendent madras by his impugned order dated august 26 1982 removed the respondent from service the respondent received a copy of the order by registered post ..... territorial limits of kerala high court the learned single judge held that the order of removal was illegal and consequently allowed the writ petition of the respondent the appellant therefore .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTHerschel Rubber (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-1987
Reported in: (1987)(12)LC148Tri(Delhi)
..... showing amongst others the quantity of excisable goods manufactured and removed rule 54 of the rules separate rules had also been ..... in relation thereto over ride the provisions in regard to removal after assessment generally applicable to all manufactured goods and salt ..... could not have been in the context of the self removal procedure and a pre determination quasi judicially of the classification .....
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