Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: sashastra seema bal act 2007 section 6 enrolment Sorted by: old Court: rajasthan jodhpur Page 1 of about 305 results (0.106 seconds)

Jul 22 2013 (HC)

Hindustan Zinc Ltd Vs. Union of India and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... .ramit mehta, for the appellant. mr. ankur mathur for mr. v.k. mathur, for the respondents. ---- by the court: reportable this appeal under section 35g of the central excise act, 1944 ('the act') has been filed against final order dated 21.03.2005 passed by the customs, excise & service tax appellate tribunal, new delhi ('cestat'), whereby, the appeal filed by the appellant ..... of duty or partial exemption for the small or cottage sector, as set forth in the schedule to the central excise tariff act, 1985 (5 of 1986), or by a notification issued under rule 8 or section 5a of the act; (ii) if the amount of refund payable on the goods is less than rupees fifty; (iii) on goods which are disposed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2013 (HC)

Pukhraj Banjara Vs. State and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... any transaction or negotiations with the authority, cannot invoke the 45 doctrine of legitimate expectation, merely on the ground that the authority has a general obligation to act fairly.17. this court also explained the remedies flowing by applying the principle of legitimate expectation : (scc pp.546-47, para33) " it is ..... said that the notification dated 03.04.2013 is wrongly made applicable retrospectively. with regard to legislative competence it is submitted that section 15 of the act of 1957 clearly provides power to the state government to prescribe method for deciding applications for allotment of mineral mines. the applicants have filed applications ..... notification dated 03.04.2013 is beyond the legislative competence of the state government because under section 15 of the mines & minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 no such power is left with the state government to provide such provision for rejection of application. learned counsel mr. rajesh joshi invited attention .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2013 (HC)

Sakhawat Ali and ors Vs. State and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... any transaction or negotiations with the authority, cannot invoke the 45 doctrine of legitimate expectation, merely on the ground that the authority has a general obligation to act fairly.17. this court also explained the remedies flowing by applying the principle of legitimate expectation : (scc pp.546-47, para33) " it is ..... said that the notification dated 03.04.2013 is wrongly made applicable retrospectively. with regard to legislative competence it is submitted that section 15 of the act of 1957 clearly provides power to the state government to prescribe method for deciding applications for allotment of mineral mines. the applicants have filed applications ..... notification dated 03.04.2013 is beyond the legislative competence of the state government because under section 15 of the mines & minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 no such power is left with the state government to provide such provision for rejection of application. learned counsel mr. rajesh joshi invited attention .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2013 (HC)

Jheema Choudhary and ors Vs. State and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... any transaction or negotiations with the authority, cannot invoke the 45 doctrine of legitimate expectation, merely on the ground that the authority has a general obligation to act fairly.17. this court also explained the remedies flowing by applying the principle of legitimate expectation : (scc pp.546-47, para33) " it is ..... said that the notification dated 03.04.2013 is wrongly made applicable retrospectively. with regard to legislative competence it is submitted that section 15 of the act of 1957 clearly provides power to the state government to prescribe method for deciding applications for allotment of mineral mines. the applicants have filed applications ..... notification dated 03.04.2013 is beyond the legislative competence of the state government because under section 15 of the mines & minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 no such power is left with the state government to provide such provision for rejection of application. learned counsel mr. rajesh joshi invited attention .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2013 (HC)

Ganpat Singh Deval and ors Vs. State and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... any transaction or negotiations with the authority, cannot invoke the 45 doctrine of legitimate expectation, merely on the ground that the authority has a general obligation to act fairly.17. this court also explained the remedies flowing by applying the principle of legitimate expectation : (scc pp.546-47, para33) " it is ..... said that the notification dated 03.04.2013 is wrongly made applicable retrospectively. with regard to legislative competence it is submitted that section 15 of the act of 1957 clearly provides power to the state government to prescribe method for deciding applications for allotment of mineral mines. the applicants have filed applications ..... notification dated 03.04.2013 is beyond the legislative competence of the state government because under section 15 of the mines & minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 no such power is left with the state government to provide such provision for rejection of application. learned counsel mr. rajesh joshi invited attention .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2013 (HC)

Ganga Vishan and ors Vs. State and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... any transaction or negotiations with the authority, cannot invoke the 45 doctrine of legitimate expectation, merely on the ground that the authority has a general obligation to act fairly.17. this court also explained the remedies flowing by applying the principle of legitimate expectation : (scc pp.546-47, para33) " it is ..... said that the notification dated 03.04.2013 is wrongly made applicable retrospectively. with regard to legislative competence it is submitted that section 15 of the act of 1957 clearly provides power to the state government to prescribe method for deciding applications for allotment of mineral mines. the applicants have filed applications ..... notification dated 03.04.2013 is beyond the legislative competence of the state government because under section 15 of the mines & minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 no such power is left with the state government to provide such provision for rejection of application. learned counsel mr. rajesh joshi invited attention .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2013 (HC)

Raju Gehlot Vs. State of Raj. and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... any transaction or negotiations with the authority, cannot invoke the 45 doctrine of legitimate expectation, merely on the ground that the authority has a general obligation to act fairly.17. this court also explained the remedies flowing by applying the principle of legitimate expectation : (scc pp.546-47, para33) " it is ..... said that the notification dated 03.04.2013 is wrongly made applicable retrospectively. with regard to legislative competence it is submitted that section 15 of the act of 1957 clearly provides power to the state government to prescribe method for deciding applications for allotment of mineral mines. the applicants have filed applications ..... notification dated 03.04.2013 is beyond the legislative competence of the state government because under section 15 of the mines & minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 no such power is left with the state government to provide such provision for rejection of application. learned counsel mr. rajesh joshi invited attention .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2013 (HC)

Chena Ram and ors Vs. State and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... any transaction or negotiations with the authority, cannot invoke the 45 doctrine of legitimate expectation, merely on the ground that the authority has a general obligation to act fairly.17. this court also explained the remedies flowing by applying the principle of legitimate expectation : (scc pp.546-47, para33) " it is ..... said that the notification dated 03.04.2013 is wrongly made applicable retrospectively. with regard to legislative competence it is submitted that section 15 of the act of 1957 clearly provides power to the state government to prescribe method for deciding applications for allotment of mineral mines. the applicants have filed applications ..... notification dated 03.04.2013 is beyond the legislative competence of the state government because under section 15 of the mines & minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 no such power is left with the state government to provide such provision for rejection of application. learned counsel mr. rajesh joshi invited attention .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2013 (HC)

Federation of Sand Stone M.i. Asso Vs. State and ors

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... any transaction or negotiations with the authority, cannot invoke the 45 doctrine of legitimate expectation, merely on the ground that the authority has a general obligation to act fairly.17. this court also explained the remedies flowing by applying the principle of legitimate expectation : (scc pp.546-47, para33) " it is ..... said that the notification dated 03.04.2013 is wrongly made applicable retrospectively. with regard to legislative competence it is submitted that section 15 of the act of 1957 clearly provides power to the state government to prescribe method for deciding applications for allotment of mineral mines. the applicants have filed applications ..... notification dated 03.04.2013 is beyond the legislative competence of the state government because under section 15 of the mines & minerals (development and regulation) act, 1957 no such power is left with the state government to provide such provision for rejection of application. learned counsel mr. rajesh joshi invited attention .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 14 2013 (HC)

Seema Vs. Babu Singh and anr

Court : Rajasthan Jodhpur

..... s.b. civil misc. appeal no.840/2013 seema belim vs. babu singh & anr. date of judgment :::14. 08.2013 present hon'ble mr. justice p.k. lohra none present. the appellant-claimant has preferred this appeal under section 173 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 1988') for enhancement of compensation awarded by the ..... learned motor accident claims tribunal, jodhpur. the factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that a claim under section 166 of the act of 1988 was laid by the appellant before the learned tribunal quantifying compensation to the tune of rs.11,25,000/- only. for claiming the said amount of compensation, the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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