Showing : 1871-1880 of 4470 Results

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 311-- Power to summon material witness or examine person present - Exercise of power - Touchstone for exercise of power is the satisfaction of the court that the evidence of any person, which comes to its notice, is essential for just decision of the case - The intention of the legislature is to empower..........
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2003, Section 3, 4, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 7, 10-- Ill gotten money acquired during tenure as Minister and then as Chief Minister - Enforcement Directorate taking notice of asserts - Such money invested through petitioner and other accused - Every reason to believe by Enforcement Directorate that offence of money laundering has been committed -..........
H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SHIMLA CAMP AT HAMIRPUR
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Postal service-- NSS account - Opening of two accounts by respondent No.1 in the same post office which was contrary to rules - Not the case of the appellant that when new account was opened they were not either aware and/or the respondent had withheld/misstated any fact - It is also not the case that second..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Constitution of India, 1950, Article 311(1)-- Punishment - Dismissal - Plea that petitioner was promoted to the post of Sub - Inspector by DIG but order of dismissal passed by Superintendent of Police hence the impugned order illegal - The appointing authority of ASI and SI is Superintendent of Police as provided under Rule 12.1 of the Rules..........
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 80-- Notice to State - State proper party - Maintainability of suit - Plaintiffs have not claimed any relief whatsoever against State - State was only a proforma defendant in suit - Plaintiffs had only prayed that defendant No.3 is the owner of suit land but defendants 1 & 2 are raising construction..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972, Section 28, Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, Section 13(2), 90, Haryana Ceiling on Lands Holdings Act, 1972, Section 12, 33, 8(3)-- Surplus area - Declared under Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act and land vested under Haryana Ceiling Act - Case cannot be reopened - Transferee is not entitled to notice before utilization of land - Provisions of Haryana Act are applicable only to surplus area case decided under the Act and not..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 6, Rule 17-- Plaint - Amendment - Amendment sought after commencement of trial on the ground that facts sought to be pleaded were already brought to the notice of counsel who inadvertently could not plead - Held, litigant cannot be allowed to suffer because of bonafide error of counsel - Litigant entitled to..........
ORISSA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138-- Dishonour of cheque - Conviction - Validity - Service of notice - Though a registered notice as contemplated u/s.138 of N.I. Act was issued same was not served upon petitioner and returned with an endorsement that he was absent for 6 to 7 days - It is also not case of complainant that petitioner..........
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138-- Dishonour of cheque - Jurisdiction - Complainant operating his business at place `P' - Cheque drawn on a Bank at place `T' - Cheque deposited at place `P' - Notice demanding accused to make payment issued from place `P' - Held, Court at place `P' has jurisdiction to entertain the compliant - Fact..........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2009
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138-- Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Non mention of 15 days period within which the amount was payable - Notice is not defective - Provision of S.138 of the Act only stipulates that accused becomes liable for prosecution if he does not pay the amount within fifteen days from the date of receipt of..........

Showing : 1871-1880 of 4470 Results