Supreme Court Enlargement Of Criminal Appealate Jurisdiction Act 1970 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: supreme court enlargement of criminal appealate jurisdiction act 1970 Sorted by: recent Page 1 of about 736 results (5.979 seconds)Muthoot Finance Limited Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Court : Karnataka
grant such other relief or directions as this hon ble court deems fit the facts and circumstances of the case 3 pledging stolen gold manner of dealing with such gold when criminal proceedings are taken up etc etc therefore i request the between muthoot finance limited a company incorporated under the companies act1956head office at muthoot chambers opp saritha thatre complex banerjee road
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMr. Gaurav K Bhandari Vs. Mr. Bharath Chandrashekhar
Court : Karnataka
the interlocutory order could be fixed by the section 9 court the time fixed has to be so fixed to achieve a commercial suit 11 1 section 148 a of the code of civil procedure is reproduced hereunder for easy reference 148 be stated in the caveat petition as to in what jurisdiction the caveat petition is filed what is required to be 9 of the arbitration and conciliation act 1996 a c act for short for appointment of a receiver to preserve and
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCyient Ltd Vs. Karnataka State Electronics Development
Court : Karnataka
53035 wp no 28909 of 2015 r in the high court of karnataka at bengaluru dated this the20h day of december be a company incorporated under the provisions of the companies act 1956 providing various software services the petitioner was originally incorporated
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBowring Institute Vs. Mr. Sarwik S
Court : Karnataka
context of the scheme as elucidated by the hon ble supreme court wherein jurisdiction to grant or refuse accused interim ex court 4 the main contention of the appellant before this court that the trial court committed an error in granting such that is why rule 3 of order 39 of the code requires that in all cases the court shall before grant contemplated under section 2 14 of the cpc but no appeal will lie against such order under order 43 rule 1 the court has no jurisdiction the court may decide the jurisdiction issue which is not only a question of law but an appeal under section 37 of the arbitration and conciliation act 1996 and also discussion was made with regard to filing
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/s. Asset Reconstruction Company (india) Limited Vs. The Senior Sub R ...
Court : Karnataka
of 2017 wp no 9578 of 2017 in the high court of karnataka at bengaluru dated this the20h day of december procedures relating thereto he is also at liberty to file criminal complaints against sridevi dr senthilnathan smt devi anti corruption council which can only be agitated before a court of competent jurisdiction and this court ought not to excise its jurisdiction in council of india allegedly on behalf of dr senthilnathan unilateral action has been taken by the senior sub registrar the document
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/s. Lancer Finance Vs. The Competent Authority
Court : Karnataka
having regard to the delay is 20 concerned the trial court while passing the order in paragraph no 6 taken note present case it is also contended that after registration of criminal case under the guise of investigation the office of respondent effect of the order of 18 stay in a pending appeal before the apex court does not amount to any declaration existence of satisfaction as required by section 3 is a jurisdictional fact and such satisfaction can be shown to have been the requirement of sections 7 1 and 2 of the act in paragraph no 13 c the trial court also taken
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSri.k. Lokesh Vs. The Bangalore District Maintenance And Welfare Of Pa ...
Court : Karnataka
observed herein above it is held by the hon ble supreme court that when right to appeal is not created such provision a function that lies beyond the jurisdiction of the court granting such a right to the transferee would contradict the persons though the parents can claim maintenance under code of criminal procedure 1973 the procedure is both time consuming as well with the prescribed procedure is well settled the right of appeal may be 28 nc 2024 khc 53004 db wa no 2024 9 4 the deputy commissioner in the exercise of jurisdiction under the act cannot annul the rights vested with the leads to ambiguity however language of section 16 of the act is clear in its plain text without any ambiguity which
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAsset Reconstruction Company (india) Limited Vs. The Senior Sub Regist ...
Court : Karnataka
no 9193 of 2017 wp no 9578 of 2017 this court to strike down such blatant illegalities 35 3 as indicated violating the provision s of stamp law and also committing criminal breach of trust on the part of arcil and its 2017 and as such the arcil would have to approach jurisdictional civil court 22 2 the said submission was reiterated and the manner in which sridevi hospital and dr senthilnathan have acted indicates a clear case of gross abuse of process of
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/s Asset Reconstruction Company (india) Limited Vs. The Senior Sub Re ...
Court : Karnataka
such actions on their part cannot be allowed by this court in the face of the above facts there is a magistrate under section 14 of the sarfaesi act by filing criminal misc no 1037 2013 which came to be allowed permitting competent jurisdiction and this court ought not to excise its jurisdiction in the matter and as such dismissal of the above in office of the sub registrar peenya and has also acted on the complaint filed by anti corruption council of india
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM/s H M Infra Tech Pvt Ltd Vs. H M Tamborine Apartments Owners Associa ...
Court : Karnataka
the argument was canvassed and brought to notice of this court paragraph 97 with regard to interpretation with regard to the of cpc and order vii rule 11 d of the code has limited scope and it must be shown that the made above i pass the following order the regular first appeal is allowed the impugned order dated 19 10 2024 passed vii rule 11 of cpc but it traveled beyond its jurisdiction 8 the counsel for the appellant in support of his of section 14 71 and 21 79 of the rera act and rightly comes to the conclusion that the plaint is
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT