Representation Of The People Amendment Act 2009 Chapter Ii - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: representation of the people amendment act 2009 chapter ii Sorted by: recent Page 1 of about 504 results (1.438 seconds)Mr. Gaurav K Bhandari Vs. Mr. Bharath Chandrashekhar
Court : Karnataka
the caveator 11 3 section 148 a was introduced by amendment in the year 1977 providing the valuable right to a purport and intent of section 9 of the a c act the operation of the interim order ought to be extended areresiding at no 538 31st main 1st cross banagirinagar bsk iii stage bangalore 560 085 respondents by sri p d surana
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCyient Ltd Vs. Karnataka State Electronics Development
Court : Karnataka
a block bmtc shantinagar k h road bangalore 560 027 represented by it managing director respondent by sri nishanth a v 000 sq feet which has provided employment to thousands of people the same would be in the interest of the state 2015 submits that no fault could be found with the actions on part of the respondent 9 heard sri dhyan chinnappa for respondent submits that in terms of clause 3 r ii of the lease cum sale agreement there is a specific
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBowring Institute Vs. Mr. Sarwik S
Court : Karnataka
in this judgment the apex court taken note of the amendment made to cpc in the year 1976 in the case an appeal under section 37 of the arbitration and conciliation act regarding interim relief exercising under section 9 also taken note of the application ii a copy of the plaint and iii copies of documents on which the applicant relies and b
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/s. Asset Reconstruction Company (india) Limited Vs. The Senior Sub R ...
Court : Karnataka
on coming to know of the same submitted a detailed representation to the senior sub registrar and his immediate superior the 9193 of 2017 wp no 9578 of 2017 financial institutions act 1993 and registered with the reserve bank of india under the aforesaid two documents in the register maintained by him iii w p no 9578 2017 is allowed a certiorari is
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/s. Lancer Finance Vs. The Competent Authority
Court : Karnataka
placed the documents before this court no doubt when the representation was given to the member of parliament the same is and other proceedings have been initiated without any cause of action it is further contended that the petition filed by the the schedule properties were acquired by the respondents prior to 2009 and 9 the same cannot be linked to present case haryana reported in 1995 suppl1scc461was discussed and at point no iii relying upon the very same judgment of state of assam
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSri.k. Lokesh Vs. The Bangalore District Maintenance And Welfare Of Pa ...
Court : Karnataka
one interpretation the court has to choose that interpretation which represents the true intention of the legislature in other words the for the court to take upon itself the task of amending or altering the statutory provisions 36 in dr baliram waman involved in the adjudication process under section 23 of the act the transferor and the transferee in this context the transferor of karnataka and others writ appeal no 96 2019 db iii sudesh chhikara vs ramti devi and another 2022 scc online
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAsset Reconstruction Company (india) Limited Vs. The Senior Sub Regist ...
Court : Karnataka
on coming to know of the same submitted a detailed representation to the senior sub registrar and his immediate superior the the reserve bank of india under section 3 of sarfaesi act 5 the facts in each of the above petitions are the aforesaid two documents in the register maintained by him iii w p no 9578 2017 is allowed a certiorari is
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/s Asset Reconstruction Company (india) Limited Vs. The Senior Sub Re ...
Court : Karnataka
on coming to know of the same submitted a detailed representation to the senior sub registrar and his immediate superior the done 33 6 the sub registrar it is clear has acted beyond his powers and in fact has abdicated all his the aforesaid two documents in the register maintained by him iii w p no 9578 2017 is allowed a certiorari is
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMs. X Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Court : Karnataka
transgenders act the government would have to carry out necessary amendments to the act of 1969 and rules framed thereunder to section 6 7 of the transgender persons protection of rights act 2019 strike out whichever is not applicable state emblem state i date of birth certificate ii aadhaar card yes no iii pan card yes no iv election voter identity card yes
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSri. Chennakeshava Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Court : Karnataka
house officer bmtf police station bbmp bengaluru bengaluru city bengaluru represented by state public prosecutor high court of karnataka building bengaluru in any form is prescribed and declared unlawful and any activity connected with or arising out of the land grabbing shall r rajeswari and others passed in w p no 28592 2009 dated 18 06 2010 wherein point was raised whether taking the act special court can try the offences specified in chapter xiv a of the karnataka land revenue act 1964 the order i the criminal revision petition is allowed in part ii the order of special court is set aside regarding the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT