So Called - Judgment Search Results

Call Vs. Palmer

Court: US Supreme Court

Call v. Palmer - 116 U.S. 98 (1885) U.S. Supreme Court Call v. Palmer, 116 U.S. 98 (1885) Call

Long Sault Development Co. Vs. Call

Court: US Supreme Court

This proceeding was commenced in the Supreme Court of New York by the Long Sault Development Company, hereinafter called the plaintiff, for the purpose of testing the constitutionality of an act of the legislature of that state,

Shriram Investment Services Limited, Unit of Shriram Group of Companie ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [2006]133CompCas830(Mad); (2006)4MLJ743

ORDERT.V. Masilamani, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition is preferred by Shriram Investment Services Limited (hereinafter called 'SISL') the respondent before the Arbitral Tribunal and Palki/Jeypad Investment (P) Ltd/Jeypad Investment (P) Ltd (hereinafter called 'Palki/Jeypad')

Digitech Call System Pvt. Ltd vs India Post Payments Bank Ltd & Anr.

Court: Delhi

AT NEW DELHI% Judgment reserved on: 23.12.2025Judgment delivered on: 17.02.2026+ W.P.(C) 15035/2025, CM APPL Nos.61930/2025, 69414/2025 & DIGITECH CALL SYSTEM PVT. LTD .....PetitionerversusINDIA POST PAYMENTS BANK LTD &ORS. .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the

“case Called Several Times Since Morning. Vs. Jagroop Kaur --respond ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

for the petitioner has argued that on 27.11.2012 itself, the trial Court had passed the following order:- “Case called several times since morning. Neither petitioner Harpinder Singh nor any counsel has appeared on behalf of petitioner. Vide

Best Call Taxi India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in: (2006)STR28

1. The lower authorities have imposed penalties of Rs. 22,615/-and Rs. 1,000/- under Sections 76 and 77 respectively of the Finance Act, 1994, on the appellants. After examining the records and hearing both sides, I find...

Best Call Taxi Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in: (2007)7STR218

1. During the period April, 2002 - September, 2003 the appellants had rendered "Call Taxi" services but did not pay Service Tax. A show-cause notice dated 10.12.2003 issued by the department sought to recover Service Tax...

Gauhati Public Call Office Association Vs. District Manager, Telephone ...

Court: Assam State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Gauhati

under provisions of the Consumers Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the Secretary of the Gauhati Public Call Office Association, which is a registered body. The main grievance of the petitioner is that in addition to

Basappa S/O Gadigeppa Hadli vs Lingaraj Calling Himself as S/O Basappa ...

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100136 OF 2024 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN:1. BASAPPA S/O GADIGEPPA...

Sunil Mittal & Anr vs.darzi on Call

Court: Delhi

mark whether be a label, device, composite, word and where finding that there was nothing else in the so called device than the words „Cafe Madras‟, the said words were held to enjoy protection; (G) The registration of