M V A L Quamar vs Tsavliris Salvage ( International ) Ltd & Ors
Judges: S B Majumdar J, Umesh C Banerjee J
17 August, 2000·PETITIONER:M.V.A.L. QUAMAR Vs. RESPONDENT:TSAVLIRIS SALVAGE (INTERNATIONAL) LTD. & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/08/2000 BENCH:S.B. Majumdar J. & Umesh C. Banerjee J.JUDGMENT:BANERJEE, J. L....I..........T.......T.......T.......T.......T. T..J Leave granted in both the SLPs.By consent of learned Sen...
Supreme Court Of India
E. Venkatakrishna vs Indian Oil Corporation And Anr.
Judges: S Bharucha, Y Sabharwal, S Variava
17 August, 2000·1. The appellant was appointed a dealer of the first respondent to distribute liquified petroleum gas. The contract in this behalf contained a Clause by reason of which the distributorship could be terminated if the dealer did anything which was prejudicial to the interests of good name of the princ...
Supreme Court Of India
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Mysore Minerals Ltd.
Judges: S Bharucha, Y Sabharwal, S Variava
17 August, 2000·1. The Revenue is in appeal against the refusal by the High Court to call for a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, of the following question proposed by it :"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that in...
Supreme Court Of India
State Of Karnataka vs K. Krishnan
Judges: K T Thomas, R P Sethi
17 August, 2000·SETHI,J.L...I...T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T..J Leave granted.A jeep bearing Registration No.KLI 3839 and Lorry with Registration No.KA-21-2071 were seized by Shri Padmanabha Gowda, Range Forest Officer, Puttur on 3.9.1997 along with six Kiralbhogi logs, a forest produce which w...
Supreme Court Of India
A. Giridari Lal vs State Of T.N. And Ors.
Judges: V Khare, S Phukan
17 August, 2000·1. The appellant is an auctioneer for Madras city and Chingleput district in the State of Tamil Nadu under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Pawn Brokers Act, 1943,(hereinafter called the 'Act'). The procedure prescribed by Rule 12(7)(v) relating to auctioning of pawned articles (movables) if not redeeme...
Supreme Court Of India
Maharashtra General Kamgar Union vs Solid Containers Ltd.
Judges:
17 August, 2000·1. Having heard learned senior counsel for the applicant as well as learned Counsel for the respondent we clarify our order of March 30, 2000 by observing that once the orders of the learned single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court were set aside the reasoning given in the said judgment...
Supreme Court Of India
A C Thalwal vs High Court Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors
Judges: Cji R C Lahoti J, K G Balakrishnan J
17 August, 2000·PETITIONER:A.C. THALWAL Vs. RESPONDENT:HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/08/2000 BENCH:CJI, R.C. Lahoti, J. & K G Balakrishnan, J.JUDGMENT:R.C. Lahoti, J. L....I..........T.......T.......T.......T.......T. T..J A.C. Thalwal, the appellant was born on 15th September, 1...
Supreme Court Of India
Shri Vishin N Khanchandani & Anr vs Vidya Lachmandas Khanchandani & Anr
Judges: K T Thomas, R P Sethi
16 August, 2000·CASE NO.:Special Leave Petition (civil) 12766 of 1999 PETITIONER:SHRI VISHIN N. KHANCHANDANI & ANR.Vs. RESPONDENT:VIDYA LACHMANDAS KHANCHANDANI & ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16/08/2000 BENCH:K.T. Thomas & R.P. Sethi.JUDGMENT:SETHI, J.Leave granted. L...I...T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T. T....
Supreme Court Of India
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Karnataka State Co-Operative ...
Judges: S Bharucha, D Mohapatra
16 August, 2000·1. Delay condoned.2. Leave granted.3. The appeals shall be heard by a Bench of three learned judges in view of the apparent conflict between the judgments of Benches of two judges of this court in M. P. Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. AddL CTT [1996] 218 1TR 438 and CIT v. Bangalore District Go-operative ...
Supreme Court Of India
Ved Prakash Agarwal vs Chairman, U.P. State Sugar ...
Judges: S Majmudar, S Phukan
16 August, 2000·1. Leave granted.2. We have heard the appellant-in-person and the learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 finally in this appeal. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are not contesting respondents.3. The short question is whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the Writ Petition No. 2667 of 2000, filed ...
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.