Skip to content

Did you mean: bye laws?


Same Case - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: same case Year: 1959 Page 1 of about 2,656 results (0.201 seconds)
Dec 02 1959 (HC)

Fulchand Hirchand Vs. N.B. Chandurkar and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Dec-02-1959

Reported in: AIR1961Bom145; (1960)62BOMLR214; ILR1960Bom328

an application in accordance with law 4 in the instant case in the execution application dated 9 12 1950 the number

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 17 1959 (HC)

Murugan Transport Vs. Its Workers and anr.

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Aug-17-1959

Reported in: (1960)ILLJ349Mad

objection and decided to go into the merits of the case the management has now come to this court for the

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 06 1959 (HC)

Raman Pillai Vs. Chacko and ors.

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Nov-06-1959

Reported in: (1960)ILLJ297Ker

..... a workman engaged by the appellant for breaking stones and transporting the same to chavara where the appellant a government contractor was repairing the ..... of calcutta 65 o w n 496 it was contended in that case that the person who died was employed in the construction repair ..... merely for breaking stones at the quarry but also for loading the same on the lorry and unloading it at the workspot and that .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 12 1959 (HC)

Kuruvilla Vs. Kuruvilla and ors.

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Feb-12-1959

Reported in: AIR1959Ker405

..... and malfeasance as against the managing agents without at the same time specifically terminating the managing agency agreement as the court ..... to the decision of the supreme court in the contrasted case in thawardas pherumal v union of india air 1955 sc ..... and malfeasance as against the managing agents without at the same time specifically terminating the managing agency agreement as the court .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 30 1959 (HC)

Angappa Chettiar (A.L. an.) Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Oct-30-1959

Reported in: (1960)ILLJ775Ker

the workers in the factory represented them the petitioner s case is that the communist party wanted to organize a union

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 10 1959 (HC)

Liladhar Mulji and anr. Vs. Inspector of Factories

Court: Kerala

Decided on: Jul-10-1959

Reported in: (1959)IILLJ750Ker

from the petitioners and distributed the wages this takes the case out of the mischief of the decisions in 1958 ii

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 23 1959 (HC)

State Vs. Abdul Majid and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Feb-23-1959

Reported in: AIR1959Raj131; 1959CriLJ772

of that judgment has been produced before us in that case the accused was granted a visa on 3 7 1956

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 03 1959 (HC)

Bugal Prashad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Decided on: Feb-03-1959

Reported in: AIR1959Raj113

..... for booking a grinding stone on 4 2 56 the petitioner denied the charge his case was that he had been falsely implicated at the instance of a railway employee namely ..... charges this was followed in choudhury v union of india air 1956 cal 662 the same view was taken by our high court in kanhaiyalal v state of rajas than air .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 11 1959 (HC)

A. Rangaswamy Iyengar Vs. Pattammal and anr.

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Sep-11-1959

Reported in: AIR1960Mad442; (1960)IIMLJ18

..... the argument is that where she is the court auction purchaser and even in a case where a third party is a court auction purchaser the maintenance claim s not extinguished ..... by the purchase and that the same properties continue to be liable for the charge certain observations of basheer ahmed sayeed j .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 17 1959 (HC)

Chunulal Seetaram Vs. G.S. Muthiah and Brothers and ors.

Court: Chennai

Decided on: Feb-17-1959

Reported in: AIR1959Mad359

..... notice two un reported decisions of the calcutta and punjab high courts respectively taking the same view but we do not think ir necessary to refer to them the appeals to ..... half the costs of the contesting party respondent advocate s fees rs 150 in each case trade mark act v of 1940 section 76 high court having jurisdiction high court at .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

  • << Prev.

Sign-up to get more results

Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.

Start Free Trial

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //