Bhakta Rame Gowda And Others vs State Of Karnataka And Another
Judges: K Ramaswamy, G Nanavati
24 January, 1997·1. Leave granted. We have heard learned Counsel on both sides.2. These appeals by special leave arise from the order of the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, made on April 29, 1994 in Application Nos. 3727/ 82 (92) and batch.3. The admitted position is that under the Karnataka Civil Services (Gener...
Supreme Court Of India
State Of Orissa And Anr. vs Dr Bhaktabandhu Mishra
Judges: S Agrawal, S S Ahmad
24 January, 1997·1. Dearly condoned.2. Special leave granted.3. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.4. By resolution dated 4-7-1964 the Government of Orissa (Health Department) decided that candidates obtaining diploma of D.M. S.M from the Orissa Medical Examination Board for condensed course of D.A. M...
Supreme Court Of India
Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs Pioma Industries And Imperial ...
Judges: J Verma, S Kurdukar
24 January, 1997·1. This appeal is against the order dated 31st March, 1994, passed by the CEGAT rejecting the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and consequently dismissing the appeal as time barred. The appeal was filed in the Tribunal on 19-6-1989 against the order of th...
Supreme Court Of India
M/S Swastic Industries vs Maharashtra State Electricity Board
Judges: K Ramaswamy, G T Nanavati Act Headnote
24 January, 1997·PETITIONER:M/S. SWASTIC INDUSTRIES Vs. RESPONDENT:MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/01/1997 BENCH:K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:O R D E R The petitioner is canvassing the correctness of the decision of the National Consumers’ Disputes Redressal Commission...
Supreme Court Of India
Sodagar Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors
Judges: K Ramaswamy, G T Nanavati Act Headnote
24 January, 1997·PETITIONER:SODAGAR SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT:STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/01/1997 BENCH:K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:O R D E R These special leave petition have been filed against the judgement and orders dated May 27,1996 and August 20,1996 passed by the Division Ben...
Supreme Court Of India
Union Of India & Ors vs Sushil Kumar Modi & Ors
Judges: J S Verma, K Ramaswamy, S P Bharucha Act Headnote
24 January, 1997·PETITIONER:UNION OF INDIA & ORS.Vs. RESPONDENT:SUSHIL KUMAR MODI & ORS.DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/01/1997 BENCH:J.S. VERMA, K. RAMASWAMY, S.P. BHARUCHA ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:Leave granted.O R D E R This order has to be read in continuation of our order dated November 5, 1996 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. ...
Supreme Court Of India
Teja Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others
Judges: Madan Mohan Punchhi, K T Thomas Act Headnote
24 January, 1997·PETITIONER:THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, THANE & ANR.Vs. RESPONDENT:H & R JOHNSON (INDIA) LTD. & ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/08/1996 BENCH:THOMAS K.T. (J) BENCH:THOMAS K.T. (J) BHARUCHA S.P. (J) CITATION:JT 1996 (7) 473 1996 SCALE (5)590 ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:THOMAS. J.J U D G M E N T The question...
Supreme Court Of India
Union Of India & Ors vs Sushil Kumar Modi & Ors
Judges: J S Verma, K Ramaswamy, S P Bharucha Act Headnote
24 January, 1997·PETITIONER:BHIM SINGH, PRESIDENTJAMMU & KASHMIR PANTHERES PARTY Vs. RESPONDENT:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA & ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/04/1996 BENCH:RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH:RAMASWAMY, K. BHARUCHA S.P. (J) PARIPOORNAN, K.S.(J) CITATION:1996 SCC (4) 188 JT 1996 (5) 569 1996 SCALE (3)481 ACT:H...
Supreme Court Of India
Teja Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others
Judges: Madan Mohan Punchhi, K T Thomas Act Headnote
24 January, 1997·PETITIONER:TEJA SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT:STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/01/1997 BENCH:MADAN MOHAN PUNCHHI, K.T. THOMAS ACT:HEADNOTE:JUDGMENT:Thomas J.J U D G M E N T This appeal is by special leave granted to the appellant Teja Singh who is the maternal uncle of Balwant Singh who die...
Supreme Court Of India
Anarkali Sarabhai,Shahibag ... vs Commissioner Of Income ...
Judges: S C Agrawal, Suhas C Sen
24 January, 1997·J U D G M E N T SEN, J.In this case the question of law is:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was liable to pay tax in respect of capital gains on receipt of the amount equal to the fact value of the preference shares o...
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.