Self Commune - Judgment Search Results

Bahour Commune Panchayat Vs Bahour Commune Panchayat

Court: Chennai

MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR and W.M.P.No.4740 of 2020, M.P.Nos.2, 2, 2 & 3 of 2015 W.P.No.25031 of 2015:1. Bahour Commune Panchayat Employees' Union Represented by its Secretary V.Anbarasan 49, Rodiyer Mill Road, Mudaliyarpettai, Pondicherry - 4.2. D.Janarthanan S/o.Devanathan

Employees of Punwire Mobile Communication Ltd. Vs. Punwire Mobile Comm ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: [2003]115CompCas565(P& H); [2004]49SCL616(Punj& Har)

of submissions Mr, Chhibber has not pressed prayer No. 1, quoted above. However, he submits that Punwire Mobile Communications Ltd. the company under liquidation, is a running company and it is providing paging services in several States.

Crompton Greaves Ltd. Vs. Sky Cell Communication Ltd. and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [2003]115CompCas832(Mad)

such right has accrued to him in law. Such a right cannot be recognised on the basis of self serving record created by him which record also does not establish that a lawful meeting of the Board … a cellular mobile telephone company, which holds a licence for providing such service in Tamil Nadu.2. Sky Cell Communications Limited (Sky Cell) was incorporated initially as a private company at Delhi on 03.03.1992 with the main object

M/S Milan Communication Vs. M/S Milan Communication

Court: Punjab and Haryana

598.o”1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR 5982/2012 Date of decision:26/02/2013 M/s Milan Communication .............Petitioner v. M/s Teri Oat Estates Pvt.Ltd.............Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Mr.Chaman Lal,Advocate for the petitioner.

Association of the Employees of Indian Institute of Mass Communication ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi

litigation. The first Applicant in this case is the Association of the Employees of Indian Institute of Mass Communication (Registered) under Indian Societies Act, 1860. Clause 10(a) of its Articles of memorandum of Association of Respondent No.1

Reliance Communication Limited Vs. State Bank of India

Court: Supreme Court of India

on part of the Reliance Companies.11. When a further application for extension of time was made on the selfsame ground, this Court made it clear by its order dated 13.12.2018 that in view of the order passed … REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL/INHERENT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.845 OF2018RELIANCE COMMUNICATION LIMITED & ORS. …..PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. …..RESPONDENTS WITH CONTEMPT PETN. (C) No.1838 OF2018IN

Geo-group Communications Inc. Vs. Iol Broadband Ltd.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 2009(14)SCALE75; (2010)1SCC562

December 1, 2005.2. The facts emerging from the record of the case are as under:The applicant, i.e., Geo-Group Communications, Inc., is a company incorporated under the laws of Delaware USA, having its principal office at USA. It

Siemens Public Communication Networks Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR2009SC1204; 155(2008)DLT621(SC); (2008) 16 SCC215

pride and business rivalry, to make mountains out of molehills of some technical/procedural violation or some prejudice to self, and persuade courts to interfere by exercising power of judicial review, should be resisted. Such interferences, either interim … 1, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, as the prime contractor for Indian Army's modernization plan for Technical Communication System (in short the `TCS'). Respondent No. 2 floated a Request for Proposal (RFP) for procurement of Digital

idea Mobile Communication Ltd. Vs. C.C.E.and C.,cochin

Court: Supreme Court of India

the aforesaid issue and in that context in its Judgment pronounced on 15th February, 2002 in Escotel Mobile Communications Ltd. vs. Union of India and Others, reported in (2002) Vol. 126 STC 475 (Kerala), it was stated

Punjab Communications Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1999SC1801; JT1999(3)SC331; 1999(3)SCALE149; (1999)4SCC727; [1999]2SCR1033

decision-making that official decisions should not be infected with motives such as fraud (or dishonesty) malice or personal self interest. Duty to act in good faith is inherent in the process. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner … M. Jagannadha Rao, J. 1. Leave granted.2. These two appeals have been filed by the Punjab Communications Ltd (hereinafter called the 'PCL'), a public-sector undertaking of the State of Punjab against the judgment dated 27.2.1998