M.G.Ravala Manikyam and Ors vs M.Mada Naik
Judges: R V Raveendran, K S Radhakrishnan
25 January, 2010·Leave granted. Heard the parties.2. The legal heirs of the plaintiff in a suit for specific performance are the appellants in this appeal by special leave. The respondent had entered into an agreement of sale dated 25.12.1986 in favour of one M.R. Gopal of whom the appellants are the legal heirs. As...
Supreme Court Of India
Union Of India & Ors vs S Vettu Perumal
Judges: R V Raveendran
25 January, 2010·IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 963 OF 2010 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.11095/2009] UNION OF INDIA & ORS APPELLANT(S) Versus S. VETTU PERUMAL RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Leave granted. Heard the parties.2. The respondent was provisiona...
Supreme Court Of India
Vikram Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab
Judges: J M Panchal
25 January, 2010·(REPORTABLE)IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. 1396-97 OF 2008Vikram Singh & Ors. ….. AppellantsVs.State of Punjab..RespondentJ U D G M E N T HARJIT SINGH BEDI,J.These appeals arise out of the following facts:1. On 14th February 2005 the decea...
Supreme Court Of India
M/S Leader Engineering Works Etc Etc vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Jalandhar
Judges: S H Kapadia, Swatanter Kumar
25 January, 2010·IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.939-941 OF 2010 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.13061-13063 of 2009) M/s. Leader Engineering Works Etc.Etc. Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar Respondent(s) O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave grant...
Supreme Court Of India
M G Ravala Mankiyam & Ors vs M Mada Naik
Judges: R V Raveendran
25 January, 2010·IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 981 OF 2010 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.35120/2009] M.G. RAVALA MANKIYAM & ORS. APPELLANT(S) Versus M. MADA NAIK RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Leave granted. Heard the parties.2. The legal heirs of the plain...
Supreme Court Of India
Provincial Co-Op D F Ltd & Ors vs Ajeet Singh
Judges: Harjit Singh Bedi, J M Panchal
25 January, 2010·IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION I.a. No. 2 in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 798 OF 2007 PROVINCIAL CO-OP. D.F. LTD. & ORS. ..... APPELLANTS VERSUS AJEET SINGH ..... RESPONDENT O R D E R Application is allowed.Matter be restored to its original number.. J [HARJ...
Supreme Court Of India
Trimex International Fze ... vs Vedanta Aluminium Limited,India
Judges: P Sathasivam
22 January, 2010·P. Sathasivam, J.1) In this petition the Petitioner-Company seeks to invoke arbitration clause under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator as per the Arbitration Agreement contained in clause 6 of the Commercial Offer (purchase order) dated 15.10....
Supreme Court Of India
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd vs Telephone Cables Ltd
Judges: R V Raveendran, K S Radhakrishnan
22 January, 2010·JUDGMENT 2010 (3) SCR 291 The Order of the Court was delivered by ORDER R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J. 1. Leave granted. Heard the parties.2. The appellant, by `Notice Inviting Tenders' dated 27.3.2001, invited bids for supply of 441 LCKM of different sizes of Polythene Insulated Jelly Filled cables (`PIJF cab...
Supreme Court Of India
Sri Jeyaram Educational Trust and ... vs A.G.Syed Mohideen and Ors
Judges: R V Raveendran, K S Radhakrishnan
22 January, 2010·R.V.RAVEENDRAN, J.Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and respondents. We have also heard the learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu and Registrar General of the Madras High Court to whom notices had been issued in regard to the interpretation of section 92 of the Code of Ci...
Supreme Court Of India
Indore Development Authority vs Mangal Amusement (P) Ltd and Ors
Judges: R V Raveendran, K S Radhakrishnan
22 January, 2010·Leave granted. Mr. T. Mahipal, learned counsel appears on caveat for respondents 1 and 2. Respondents 3 and 4 being proforma parties, insofar as the present appeal is concerned, notice to them is dispensed. Heard the learned counsel.2. Respondents 1 and 2 filed a writ petition before the Madhya Prad...
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.