LawMirror.com

Results of first appeal

Andriod Application iphone Application

Showing : 8081-8090 of 10225 Results

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 394 -- Conviction u/ss 302 and 394 IPC - Appeal against - Circumstantial evidence - Accused last seen in the company of deceased and seen running from place of incident soon after incident not established on basis of evidence - Ornaments recovered from shop other than that disclosed by accused cannot be said to be recovery at the..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Pre-emption -- Property in Jaipur - Plaintiff owner of 3/4 share and defendants No.2-4 of 1/4 share - Defendants No.2-4 sold their 1/4th share on 30.7.1962 for Rs.4,499/- to defendant No.1 - Plaintiff seeking declaration and pre-emption - Munsif dismissed - Civil Judge decreed suit - Upheld by High Court - Issue of talab - Necessary under Customary Mohammadan Law -..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2001
Details

National Security Act, 1980, Section 3(2) -- Detention order - Quashing of - Validity - Contention that order of detention quashed by High Court solely on ground that Lt. Governor rejected representation of detenu taking into consideration report submitted by advisory board and therefore, did not consider representation independently - No finding that there was delay or..........

ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HYDERABAD

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15 -- Appeal - Additional evidence - Application filed at appellate stage to receive in evidence copy of revocation deed dated 2.9.1996 - This document was not filed although the matter was pending before the District Forum till 13.2.1998 - The reasons assigned for not filing document early found not convincing - The application to..........

PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15 -- Appeal - Condonation of delay - Delay of 10 days in filing the appeal - Appellant-Company attributing the delay to official process - No reasonable ground given - Application submitted in a casual manner with deficient material, which could not justify condonation of delay in filing the appeal - Appeal dismissed as time barred...........

PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Compensation -- Award of - District Forum directing refund of the amount of Rs.1382/- alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. - Complainant had to move the District Forum due to fault of the OP - Complainant had to spend lot of time and money to pursue his case before the District Forum - He must have spent on typing and other miscellaneous matters with regard to filing and pursing..........

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100 -- Second appeal - Pleadings - Arguments also taken in lower appellate Court but was rejected on the ground that it was beyond pleadings - Held, this is a legal plea which can be taken at any time...........

BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 498A, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 37, 386 -- Deceased young girl of 20 made to snuff out her life on account of coercing demand of dowry by husband and his illicit relationship with another woman - Amounts to cruelty - Accused acquitted - State's appeal against acquittal - Delay of 16 years in hearing of appeal - Held, mere delay..........

PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 15 -- Appeal - Limitation - Condonation of delay - According to the applicant it came to his knowledge only on 18.10.2000 that his complaint had been dismissed on 1.10.1999 - In the absence of making a mention regarding the date of receipt of certified copy of order under appeal, the application held to be vague and not disclosing any..........

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2001
Details

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 8, 21, 42 -- Conviction - Appeal against - Not clear from record how and through whom information by SHO was sent to SP - No evidence that information was recorded by SP - Failure to comply with S.42(2) - Quantity of sample too meagre to be weighed - PW 6 denying from his signature on letter sending sample for..........

Showing : 8081-8090 of 10225 Results