Vijaykumar V Sunderlal - Judgment Search Results

Anil Kumar Ojha Vs. Appellate Authority, District Co-operative Land De ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(1)MPLJ597

For this reliance is being placed on a decision given by this Court in the case reported as Vijaykumar v. Sunderlal Mannalal, 1983 MPLJ 762. From this judgment, it is sought to be inferred that even if some power

Vishwambhar S/O Malharrao Kulkarni, (Niturkar), (Since Deceased, Throu ...

Court: Mumbai Aurangabad

Bom.C.R. 293]; Anant Tulshiram Bajaj vs Chaguram Ishwardas Keshwani [1994 (2) B.C.R. 122]; Manikchand Manaji Sarode vs Dr. Vijaykumar M. Kawadiya [1995 (4) B.C.R.542]; and M/s Nanded Wine Mart vs Suresh Shanaklal Dhoot [2000 (2) B.C.R. 784]. … paras 11 and 12 from the reported judgment in the case of Sunderlal Kundanmal Patni vs Nagori Printing Press and another [2001 (3) B.C.R. 217] … as under: It is the case of the revision applicants, who are the legal representatives of original petitioner/landlord Vishwambhar, that the suit premises consists of a shop admeasuring 15 x 20 ft. out of House No. 1270/6,

Shri Vinod Kumar Gosalia Vs. Shri Frank Silva Lobo Norton

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1984)86BOMLR196

Mr. Usgaoncar further contended, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has held in the case of Smt. Mankunwar Bai v. Sunderlal Jain : AIR1978MP54 , that under Section 13(1) of the M.P. Act it is not necessary for the

Hiralal Dayaram Patil Vs. Bhikari Sampat Shinde

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR481

the transaction which imposed personal liability on him.11. We may refer to the decision of this Court in Vijaykumar v. Gokulchand (1964) 68 Bom. L.R. 891, In this case, the question for consideration was whether a contract entered

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. D. Lakshminarayanaswamy

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [1999]238ITR976(Mad)

High Courts in All India Lakshmi Commercial Bank Officer's Union v. Union of India : [1984]150ITR1(Delhi) ; Patil Vijaykumar v. Union of India : [1985]151ITR48(KAR) ; Krishna Murthy (M.) v. CIT : [1985]152ITR163(AP) and CIT v. Rajeshwar Prasad

Ved Prakash Gupta Vs. Chotelal and ors.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1978MP250; 1978MPLJ447

contention of the learned counsel for the applicant, reliance is placed on the Full Bench case of Mankunwarbai v. Sunderlal Jain (1978 Jab LJ 6) : (AIR 1978 Madh Pra 54), The contention appears to be well-founded. The

M/S. Essar Constructions Vs. N.P. Rama Krishna Reddy

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 2000(3)ALT51(SC); JT2000(5)SC505; (2000)3MLJ130(SC); 2000(4)SCALE328; (2000)6SCC94; 2000(2)LC1107(SC)

maintainable. It does not apply to the facts of this case.29. The second decision cited was Modan Lal v. Sunderlal : [1967]3SCR147 . In that case the question of appealability of an order rejecting an application under Section

State of Kerala Vs. Kunju

Court: Kerala

Reported in: 2005(4)KLT611

treated as a petition to set aside the award as held by the Apex Court in Madan Lal v. Sunderlal and Anr., : [1967]3SCR147 . However, such petition should also be filed within 30 days of notice of

Ramavtar Verma Vs. Smt. Chintamani Verma and ors.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2004MP137; II(2004)DMC398; 2004(2)MPHT132; 2004(2)MPLJ87

applicant and thus revision would be competent, but that line of reasoning has been expressly overruled by Surajmal v. Sunderlal (supra).4. It has also been argued that application for maintenance pen-dente life and litigation expenses in an independent

Narayan Tukaram Baddi Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: (1996)1GLR31

this aspect of delay is summarized in the following words by the Supreme Court in the case of Vijaykumar v. Stale of J. and K., reported in : [1982]3SCR522 and the said quotation is further approved by the