Sheshank Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd vs Union Of India and Ors
Judges: S P Bharucha, K S Paripoornan
19 November, 1996·J U D G M E N T BHARUCHA, J.The principal judgment was delivered by a Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka in the case of M/s. Kamath Packaging Limited (Civil Appeal No. 1153/92). In the other matters the High Court followed the aforesaid judgment.A writ petition was filed by M/s. Kamath Pa...
Supreme Court Of India
Sevaliram Gotiram Teli ( Deceased)By Heirs And Lrs vs Madhukar Yeshwant Patankar & Ors
Judges: N P Singh, S B Majmudar Act Headnote
19 November, 1996·PETITIONER:SEVALIRAM GOTIRAM TELI (DECEASED)BY HEIRS AND LRS Vs. RESPONDENT:MADHUKAR YESHWANT PATANKAR & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/11/1996 BENCH:N.P. SINGH, S.B. MAJMUDAR ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:S.B. Majmudar, J.J U D G M E N T In this appeal the question that falls for our consideration is as to w...
Supreme Court Of India
The State Of Punjab vs Sarwan Singh
Judges: K Ramaswamy, G B Pattanaik Act Headnote
19 November, 1996·PETITIONER:INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,U.P. & ANR.Vs. RESPONDENT:AVDESH KUMAR & ORS. ETC.DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/04/1996 BENCH:RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH:RAMASWAMY, K.G.B. PATTANAIK (J) CITATION:JT 1996 (5) 365 1996 SCALE (4)392 ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7503, 7502, 7504, 7506, ...
Supreme Court Of India
State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors vs Vinay Kumar Jain
Judges: B P Jeevan Reddy, K S Paripoornan Act Headnote
19 November, 1996·PETITIONER:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.Vs. RESPONDENT:VINAY KUMAR JAIN DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/11/1996 BENCH:B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, K.S. PARIPOORNAN ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, J.J U D G M E N T The Uttar Pradesh Entertainments and Petting Tax Act, 1979 provides for two modes of levy of ente...
Supreme Court Of India
The State Of Punjab vs Sarwan Singh
Judges: K Ramaswamy, G B Pattanaik Act Headnote
19 November, 1996·PETITIONER:THE STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. RESPONDENT:SARWAN SINGH DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/11/1996 BENCH:K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:Present :Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Ramaswamy Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.B. Pattanaik Ranbir Yadav, Adv. for R.S. Suri, Adv. for the appellant B.B. Vashisht, P. ...
Supreme Court Of India
Ramniklal N Bhutta & Anr vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors
Judges: B P Jeevan Reedy, K S Paripoornan Act Headnote
19 November, 1996·PETITIONER:RAMNIKLAL N. BHUTTA & ANR.Vs. RESPONDENT:STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/11/1996 BENCH:B.P. JEEVAN REEDY, K.S. PARIPOORNAN ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:J U D G M E N T B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.Leave granted.This appeal is preferred against the order of the Bombay High Court dismiss...
Supreme Court Of India
Collector Of Customs(Preventive ), Ahmedabad vs M/S Essar Gujarat Ltd , Surat
Judges: B P Jeevan Reddy, Suhas C Sen, K S Paripooran Act Headnote
19 November, 1996·PETITIONER:COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS(PREVENTIVE), AHMEDABAD Vs. RESPONDENT:M/S. ESSAR GUJARAT LTD., SURAT. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/11/1996 BENCH:B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, SUHAS C. SEN, K.S. PARIPOORAN ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:SEN,J.J U D G M E N T The first dispute in this case relates to the question whether the l...
Supreme Court Of India
State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Gangula Satya Murthy
Judges: A S Anand, K T Thomas Act Headnote
19 November, 1996·PETITIONER:STATE OF U.P.Vs. RESPONDENT:AMEER ALI DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/04/1996 BENCH:RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH:RAMASWAMY, K. BHARUCHA S.P. (J) PARIPOORNAN, K.S.(J) CITATION:JT 1996 (4) 123 1996 SCALE (3)435 ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:Leave granted.O R D E R We have heard learned counsel on both sides.This...
Supreme Court Of India
State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Gangula Satya Murthy
Judges: A S Anand, K T Thomas Act Headnote
19 November, 1996·PETITIONER:STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. RESPONDENT:GANGULA SATYA MURTHY DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/11/1996 BENCH:A.S. ANAND, K.T. THOMAS ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:THOMAS, J.J U D G M E N T A girl of sixteen (Satya Vani) was raped and throttled to death. This was the gravamen of the charge put against respond...
Supreme Court Of India
Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs Hyderabad Race Club, Malakpet, ...
Judges: S P Bharucha, K Venkataswami
19 November, 1996·J U D G M E N T BHARUCHA. J.The Revenue challenges the correctness of the order of Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal which holds that the totaliser system installed at the race course of the respondents was not liable to excise duty. Upon the record before it, the Tribunal came t...
Supreme Court Of India
Don’t wait for legal issues to escalate
By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, Refund Policy and Content Policies. © 2023 - Uber9 Business Process Services Private Limited. All rights reserved.