Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: standards of weights and measures enforcement act 1985 54 of 1985 section 17 procedure of registration Sorted by: recent Court: us supreme court Page 10 of about 94 results (0.180 seconds)

State of Orissa and ors. Vs. Titaghur Paper Mills Company Limited and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1985SC1293; 1986(1)ARBLR135(SC); 1985(2)SCALE410; 1985Supp(1)SCC280; [1985]3SCR26; [1985]60STC213(SC)

..... of the matter which was not brought to the notice of the court, and the resulting omission to advert to it has seriously impaired, if not completelynullified, the effect and weight of the decision in chhotabhai's case as a precedent.135. we may also usefully reproduce the following passages (at page 354) from the concluded portion of the judgment :from ..... . the division bench then turned to the 'rules for gradation of cut sizes of timber' prepared and issued in october, 1960, by the indian standards institution which showed the word 'timber' was freely used for kinds of standard cut sizes for building purposes. the division bench also looked at indian airlines quotation no. 406 of april 26, 1972, in which the words .....

Rostker Vs. Goldberg

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 1979). see also s.rep. no. 96-826, supra, at 159 ("other administrative problems such as housing and different treatment with regard to dependency, hardship and physical standards would also exist"). it is not for this court to dismiss such problems as insignificant in the context of military preparedness and the exigencies of a future mobilization. congress also ..... raise and maintain armies. [ footnote 2/5 ] the majority also notes, page 453 u. s. 89 ante at 453 u. s. 64 , that "the court accords `great weight to the decisions of congress,'" quoting columbia broadcasting system, inc. v. democratic national committee, 412 u. s. 94 , 412 u. s. 12 (1973), and that the court has ..... that this court is called upon to perform," blodett v. holden, 275 u. s. 142 , 275 u. s. 148 (1927) (holmes, j.) -- the court accords "great weight to the decisions of congress." columbia broadcasting system, inc. v. democratic national committee, 412 u. s. 94 , 412 u. s. 102 (1973). the congress is a coequal branch .....

City of Mobile Vs. Bolden

Court : US Supreme Court

..... racially discriminatory purpose. the plurality also apparently reaffirms the vitality of white v. regester and whitcomb v. chavis, which established the standards for determining whether at-large election systems are unconstitutionally discriminatory. the plurality nonetheless casts aside the meticulous application of the principles of these ..... presumed to have "intended" that there would be no negro commissioners, simply because that was a foreseeable consequence of at-large voting, it applied an incorrect legal standard. "'discriminatory purpose' . . . implies more than intent as volition or intent as awareness of consequences. . . . it implies that the decisionmaker . ..... of citizens of all races shall be of substantially equal weight. furthermore, a disproportionate impact test under the fifteenth amendment would not lead to constant judicial intrusion into the process of official decisionmaking. rather, the standard would reach only those decisions having a discriminatory effect upon .....

Monroe Vs. Pape

Court : US Supreme Court

..... . . shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." [ footnote 3/6 ] civil liability has always been drawn from such indefinite standards as reasonable care, a man of ordinary prudence, foreseeability, etc. and see baltimore & ohio r. co. v. groeger, 266 u. s. 521 ; miller v. strahl, 239 u ..... possible construction of "under color" in the sweeping context of r.s. 1979. all this is said quite apart from the consideration of how little weight may properly be given to inferences drawn from the silence of minority reports of congressional committees, especially committees sitting almost a century after the enactment of the ..... than in constitutional cases, where this court -- although even in such cases a wise consciousness of the limitations of individual vision has impelled it always to give great weight to prior decisions -- nevertheless bears the ultimate obligation for the development of the law as institutions develop. see, e.g., smith v. allwright, 321 u. s .....