Require - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: require Year: 1985 Page 1 of about 3,615 results (0.057 seconds)Madhusudhan Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-12-1985
Reported in: ILR1987KAR688
orders enforceability on coming into force on due publication unless published in official gazette or otherwise rights of parties not...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTShyam Sunder U. Nichani Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Ban ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Sep-20-1985
Reported in: 1985(6)ECC219; 1985(22)ELT751(Kar); ILR1986KAR3232
..... in the said factory on 24 11 1981 the petitioner filed a classification list as required under rule 173b of the central excise rules rules for approval by the proper authority ..... the rules exemption of the whole of excise duty is allowed subject to satisfying the requirements referred to therein 2 the classification list filed by the petitioner was approved by respondent .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState of Karnataka and ors. Vs. T.V. Ganji
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Aug-08-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Kant94; ILR1985KAR3613
..... excise spirituous preparations manufacture sales and accounts rules 1969 clearly show that a licence is required under the said rules in respect of the spirituous preparations admittedly alcohol content in the ..... excise spirituous preparations manufacture sales and accounts rules 1969 clearly show that a licence is required under the said rules in respect of the spirituous preparations it is for the .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSyed Amjad Pasha Qadi Vs. Rahimunnisa Begum
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Oct-09-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR4004
..... no 1 property to the exclusion of the plaintiff it also requires the consideration as to whether the plaintiffs claim can be satisfied ..... the defects which have been brought to our notice and which require solution by the learned subordinate judge the calcutta high court has ..... be divided into the same shares as the land it also requires the consideration as to whether the plaintiffs claim can be .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBabu Tayappa Appugol Vs. Shanta
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-28-1985
Reported in: ILR1985KAR4013
..... complainant at that stage need not prove the offence alleged which he required to do only at the stage of trial after the accused are ..... further argued in a case of this nature the complainant is not required to establish that the second marriage was cont ducted with all the ..... by him alone 12 it is necessary to keep in view these requirements of law while considering the acts of the accused in a given .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTYogeshwar Jaiswal Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Jan-31-1985
Reported in: AIR1985SC516; 1985(1)SCALE204; (1985)1SCC725; [1985]2SCR790; 1985(17)LC619(SC)
..... force in any case for more than four months necessarily therefore the state government is required by law to pass its orders under section 68d of the act as early as ..... repealed per s k das and sarkar jj section iv of the regulation does not require an application for taking security and the court can act suo motu art 181 is confined .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSant Lal JaIn Vs. Avtar Singh
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Mar-12-1985
Reported in: AIR1985SC857; 1985(1)SCALE423; (1985)2SCC332; [1985]3SCR184; 1985(17)LC609(SC)
1 this appeal by special leave is by the plaintiff against the reversing judgment of the punjab and haryana high...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Income-tax Vs. Meera and Co.
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Aug-28-1985
Reported in: [1986]161ITR31(P& H)
..... the declarations furnished under the scheme iii that under section 24 1 the declaration was required to be made in respect of the amount which represented the income of the declarant .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Income-tax Vs. Maya Ram Jia Lal
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Oct-18-1985
Reported in: (1986)53CTR(P& H)314; [1986]162ITR520(P& H)
gokal chand mital j 1 m s maya ram jia lal hereinafter referred to as the assessee carries on business...
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTHimmatram LaxminaraIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Aug-26-1985
Reported in: [1986]161ITR7(P& H)
gokal chand mttal j 1 m s himmatram laxminarain hereinafter called the assessee carried on business in gur and shakkar...
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