When is an Offence Committed Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881?
|
|
- Neal Oscar Lewis
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 When is an Offence Committed Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881? Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ( Act ), including Sections , was introduced by the Parliament of India in 1988 in order to improve the acceptability of cheques by criminalizing the issuance of cheques by a person without sufficient funds in his bank account. Position of law before and after the decision of the Apex Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. In the landmark case of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. ( Dashrath ), a 3 judge bench of the Supreme Court of India extensively examined the ingredients of Section 138 of the Act, in order to evaluate the completion of commission of an offence under it. The Apex Court, in Dashrath, overruled its earlier decision on the same issue in Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan[1] ( Bhaskaran ). In Bhaskaran, a division bench of the Apex Court held that an offence under Section 138 of the Act can be said to be committed only if all the conditions mentioned in the main clause and the proviso to the main clause under section 138 of the Act, are satisfied. In criminal cases, in line with Section 178(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( CrPC ), where the offence consists of several acts done in different local areas, it may be inquired to or tried by a court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas. Accordingly, in line with Section 178 of CrPC, it was decided in Bhaskaran that the jurisdiction for an offence under Section 138 of the Act will vest with courts where any of the events mentioned under Section 138, including the proviso thereto, have occurred. However, it was observed that the decision in Bhaskaran was misused by the complainants to harass the accused by filing complaints at courts of places which are otherwise substantially unrelated to the offence. Accordingly, the Apex Court whittled down the ratio in Bhaskaran by giving primacy to (a) the situs of service of the notice on the accused over issuance of notice by the complainant under Section 138 of the Act[2] and (b) to the location of the bank on which the cheque is drawn over the collecting bank (inference from Ishar Alloy[3] as clarified in the Dashrath).
2 Having considered the preceding cases, the Apex Court in Dashrath created a distinction between the event of commission of offence and cognizance of such offence leading to prosecution. It was reasoned that Section 138 of the Act is structured in two parts primary and proviso. Section 138 of the Act provides that an offence is deemed to be committed when the following conditions are met: (i) cheque is issued in discharge of a liability; (ii) cheque is presented to the bank; and (iii) the cheque is returned by the bank unpaid, due to insufficiency of funds in the bank account or it is in excess of the amount allowed to be paid from such bank account by an agreement with that bank. Additionally, the proviso (a) to (c) to Section 138 provide that nothing in Section 138 will apply till the following conditions are met: (i) the cheque is presented by the payee or holder in due course within the validity period; (ii) payee or the holder in due course has made a demand for the payment of the said amount of money to such drawer of the cheque by a written notice within the period of 30 days from receipt of information from the bank regarding return of the said cheque as unpaid and (iii) drawer of the cheque fails to make the payment to payee or holder in due course within 15 days of receipt of notice demanding payment from the payee or holder in due course. In the instant matter, it was held by the Apex Court that an offence is deemed to be committed under Section 138 when the requirements as provided in the clause as distinguished from the proviso - are completed, i.e. when the bank returns the cheque. The conditions in proviso to Section 138 of the Act merely postpone the prosecution of the offence till the additional conditions are met. It was reasoned that it is an established rule of construction that a proviso is limited to the subject-matter of the principal clause and merely qualifies the principal clause. Keeping in mind the legal implications of such a decision, the Apex Court directed that all pending cases should be treated as follows: (a) where the proceedings are at the stage of recording of evidence under Section 145(2) of the Act or beyond, the cases shall be deemed to be transferred by the Apex Court from the court which ordinarily possesses territorial jurisdiction in line with Dashrath to court where it is presently pending; and (b) all other complaints to be returned and accordingly filed/refiled in the appropriate court within 30 days from date of return of the complaint. The decision in Dashrath sought to protect the interests of justice and obviate misuse of the statute, by restricting the jurisdiction to try an offence under Section 138 of the Act to court of the place where the cheque is returned by the drawee bank.
3 Subsequent decisions on territorial jurisdiction of courts for offences under section 138 of the Act Cheques made payable at par at all branches of such bank have led to the courts introducing a fresh aspect in the determination territorial jurisdiction of courts for offences under Section 138 of the Act. In the case of Ramanbhai Mathurbai Patel v. State of Maharastra and Anr.[4] ( Ramanbhai ), a single Judge of the High Court of Bombay was faced with a situation wherein the accused had issued two cheques, drawn on the Gandhinagar branch of the State Bank of India and Bank of Maharashtra in Ahmedabad respectively. These cheques were payable at par at all branches of the respective banks. Accordingly, the payee sought to clear the cheques at the nearest available branch of both the banks in Mumbai and the same were dishonoured. The question was whether the courts in Mumbai or Ahmedabad will have jurisdiction to try the offences considering the cheque was payable at par at all branches of respective banks across India. It was noted that by issuing cheques payable at par at all branches, the drawer of the cheque had given the option to the bank of the payee to clear the cheque from the nearest branch of the drawee bank. Accordingly, vide an order dated 25 August 2014, it was held by the Bombay High Court that the courts in Mumbai will have the jurisdiction to try the offences under Section 138 of the Act as the cheques were dishonoured in Mumbai. The accused has filed a special leave petition before the Apex Court to appeal from the said order of the Bombay High Court in Ramanbhai.[5] Vide an order dated 16 December 2014, a 2 judge bench of the Apex Court has granted an interim stay on the order of the High Court of Bombay in Ramanbhai. The said special leave petition is presently pending before the Apex Court. Subsequently in Smt. Sangita Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.[6] ( Sangita ), a single Judge of the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) also examined the question of whether the offence under Section 138 of the Act takes place at the branch of the drawee bank where payment is sought by the payee or the original branch where the account of the drawer is maintained, in the case of a cheque made payable at par at branches all over India. The court highlighted the distinction between (a) the branch of the bank which processes the payment and (b) the original branch of the bank which physically holds the funds of the drawer and which gives its approval for payment to the former branch. Vide an order dated 13 January 2015, it was held that the former branch is merely a processing or facilitating branch and the latter branch which physically holds the funds of the drawer is the drawee bank. Accordingly, it was held that irrespective of the location of the branch where the payee seeks to clear the cheque, the
4 court of the place where original branch of the bank is located will have jurisdiction to try the offence under Section 138 of the Act. The order of the Bombay High Court (Napur Bench) in Sangita does not refer to the decision of the co-ordinate bench of Bombay High Court in Ramanbhai and the pending appeal from the same before the Apex Court. As a result, the order in Sangita appears to be per incuriam and to that extent it cannot be considered a reliable authority in law. Conflict between the decisions of the Apex Court in Dashrath and Yogendra Pratap Singh v. Savitiri Pandey and Anr. In Yogendra Pratap Singh v. Savitri Pandey and Anr. ( Yogendra ), a 3 judge bench of the Apex Court primarily considered the question of whether cognizance of an offence can be taken on the basis of a complaint before the expiry of 15 day period as stipulated in proviso (c) to Section 138 of the Act. In this light, the Apex Court examined the provisions of Section 138 of the Act to ascertain when an offence is said to be completed under it. The Apex Court held that the an offence under Section 138 of the Act is only made effective when the conditions mentioned in main section as well as the three conditions mentioned in provisos to Section 138 of the Act are completed. As a result, it was held that cognizance of an offence cannot be taken on the basis of a complaint before the expiry of 15 day period as stipulated in proviso (c) to Section 138 of the Act. Further, the Apex Court directed that all the pending pre-mature complaints under Section 138 of the Act are to be returned and refiled within 30 days of the date of decision in Yogendra. While deciding the Yogendra, the learned 3 judge bench of the Apex Court did not refer to the earlier decision of the co-ordinate bench of the Apex Court in Dashrath. The ratio decidendi in Yogendra contradicts the ratio decidendi in Dashrath as the latter, unlike the former, does not include the conditions mentioned in provisos to Section 138 of the Act as necessary ingredients of the offence. Accordingly, a division bench of the Apex Court in M/s Goyal MG Gases Pvt. Ltd. Etc. v. IND Synergy Ltd. & Ors. Etc.[7], vide an order dated 13 January 2015, has referred the decision in Yogendra to another bench of 3 learned judges of the Apex Court. Concluding Remarks It is evident that there is a lack of clarity on the point of when an offence is said to be committed under Section 138 of the Act as well as the courts of
5 appropriate jurisdiction to file a complaint for the same. The courts have moved from a complainant-friendly approach in Bhaskaran to an accusedcentric approach in Dashrath and Yogendra by interpreting the provisions of Section 138 of the Act to protect the accused from misuse of territorial jurisdiction of courts and filing of pre-mature complaints under Section 138 of the Act. The provisions of Section 138 of the Act are drafted such that both interpretations of the said section provided in Dashrath and Yogendra are acceptable. It appears to be the need of the hour that the position of law on determination of courts of appropriate jurisdiction as well as completion of commission of an offence under Section 138 of the Act is finalized by the way of a legislative enactment. In any event, as pointed out by the Apex Court in the Dashrath, creditors are required to be diligent on this count and insist that the cheques in question be made payable at a place of the creditor s convenience. Sachin Mandlik is a Partner, Vishal Shriyan is a Senior Associate and Aakashi Lodha is an Associate at Khaitan & Co. [1] (1999) 7 SCC 510 [2] Harman Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. National Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 1 SCC 720.
6 [3] Ishar Alloy Steels Ltd. v. Jayaswals Neco Ltd. (2001) 3 SCC 609. [4] MANU/MH/1374/2014. [5] SLP (Criminal) No of [6] MANU/MH/0040/2015. [7] SLP (Criminal) Nos /2015.
Through: Mr. Kuljeet Rawal, Adv. for R-2 to 6 Mr. Vinod Diwakar, APP for the State.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Reserved on: 08th December, 2014 Date of Decision: 17thDecember, 2014 CRL. M.C. Nos.4106/2014, 4107/2014 & 4108/2014 GOOD LUCK
More informationJudgment reserved on: November 22, 2010 Judgment delivered on: November 24, Through: Mr. Tarun Rana, Advocate
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: November 22, 2010 Judgment delivered on: November 24, 2010 + CRL. M.C. NO.2172/2010 & CRL.M.A. No.8555/2010 DHANANJAY JOHRI Through: Mr.
More informationJurisdiction Conundrum in Cheque Bounce Matters The Negotiable Instrument (Amendment) Act 2015 a Panacea
Jurisdiction Conundrum in Cheque Bounce Matters The Negotiable Instrument (Amendment) Act 2015 a Panacea 1 Garv Malhotra and 2 Maneesh Kumar 1 Advocate, Supreme Court of India. 2 Joint Secretary, Ministry
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO OF
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2362 OF 2014 Mr.Ramanbhai Mathurbhai Patel... Petitioner V/s. State of Maharashtra & Anr.... Respondents... Mr.Raju M.
More information66 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIO-LEGAL ANALYSIS AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT VOLUME 3 ISSUE I ISSN
66 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIO-LEGAL ANALYSIS AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT JURISDICTION FOR DISHONOUR OF CHEQUES- THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT) ACT 2015-A PANACEA By: Ms. Anjana Dave Research scholar,
More informationAN OVERVIEW OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, Introduction
LAW MANTRA THINK BEYOND OTHERS (I.S.S.N 2321-6417 (Online) Ph: +918255090897 Website: journal.lawmantra.co.in E-mail: info@lawmantra.co.in contact@lawmantra.co.in AN OVERVIEW OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
More informationTHE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2015
1 AS INTRODUCED IN LOK SABHA Bill No. 151 of 2015 THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2015 A BILL further to amend the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. BE it enacted by Parliament in the Sixty-sixth
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL No OF 2012 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1837 OF 2012 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 8255 of 2010) REPORTABLE Indra Kumar Patodia & Anr.... Appellant(s) Versus
More informationMr. Mukesh Gupta, APP for the State. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. for R-2. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 CRL.M.C. No. 3426/2011 & Crl.M.A. No. 12164/2011(Stay) Reserved on:6th March, 2012 Decided on: 20th March, 2012 DHEERAJ
More informationPrem Chand Vijay Kumar vs Yashpal Singh And Anr on 2 May, J U D G M E N T (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No of 2004) ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
Supreme Court of India Author: A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 651 of 2005 PETITIONER: Prem Chand Vijay Kumar RESPONDENT: Yashpal Singh and Anr DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/05/2005
More informationDalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd vs M/S.Galaxy Trades & Agencies Ltd... on 19 January, 2001
Supreme Court of India Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd vs M/S.Galaxy Trades & Agencies Ltd.... on 19 January, 2001 Author: Sethi Bench: R.P.Sethi, K.T.Thomas CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 957 of 2000 PETITIONER:
More informationA Quick Guide. February 2017 Edition (Sixth Edition) Includes changes in law introduced by The Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2015
A Quick Guide To Action on Bouncing of Cheque February 2017 Edition (Sixth Edition) Includes changes in law introduced by The Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2015 www.indialegalhelp.com (This Guide
More information$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on:10 th September, 2015
$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1050/2015 Judgment delivered on:10 th September, 2015 SWARAJ ALIAS RAJ SHRIKANT THACKREY... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Arvind K Nigam, Senior
More informationReserved on: 3 rd February, 2010 Pronounced on: 4 th February, 2010
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl.M.C.1761/2009 Reserved on: 3 rd February, 2010 Pronounced on: 4 th February, 2010 # KAMAL GOYAL.... Petitioner! Through: Mr.Vikas Mahajan & Mr.Vishal Mahajan,
More informationRamrajsingh vs State Of M.P. & Anr on 15 April, 2009 REPORTABLE
Supreme Court of India Ramrajsingh vs State Of M.P. & Anr on 15 April, 2009 Author:. A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Lokeshwar Singh Panta, P. Sathasivam REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2010 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 320-336 OF 2010 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos. 445-461 of 2008) National Small Industries Corp. Ltd....
More informationINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT (IJM)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT (IJM) ISSN 0976-6502 (Print) ISSN 0976-6510 (Online) Volume 7, Issue 2, February (2016), pp. 177-182 http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/index.asp Journal Impact Factor (2016):
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl. M.(C ) No. 1514/2007. Judgment reserved on: September 05, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl. M.(C ) No. 1514/2007 Judgment reserved on: September 05, 2008 Judgment delivered on: November 03, 2008 Suresh Jindal...
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1534 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.1439 of 2017) N. Harihara Krishnan Appellant Versus J. Thomas Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. IA Nos.1726/07, 1727/07 and CS (OS) No. 1196/2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IA Nos.1726/07, 1727/07 and CS (OS) No. 1196/2006 Date of decision : December 20, 2007 M/S ARINITS SALES PVT. LTD.... PLAINTIFF
More informationN. Harihara Krishnan vs J. Thomas on 30 August, 2017 REPORTABLE. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.
Supreme Court of India N. Harihara Krishnan vs J. Thomas on 30 August, 2017 Author: Chelameswar REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1534 OF 2017
More informationA Quick Guide. January 2018 Edition (Seventh Edition)
A Quick Guide To Action on Bouncing of Cheque January 2018 Edition (Seventh Edition) www.indialegalhelp.com (This Guide is strictly for information only. While all efforts have been made to ensure accuracy
More informationRe: Supreme Court Guidelines in Cheque Bounce cases U/s 138 (NI Act)
11 June 2014 Circular No. 29/ Banking & Finance No.1 /2014-15 To : Members of the Committee All Members Re: Supreme Court Guidelines in Cheque Bounce cases U/s 138 (NI Act) Dear Sir, As you are aware,
More informationTHE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL, 2002
THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS (AMENDMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL, 2002 A BILL further to amend the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891 and the Information Technology
More informationTHE GAZETTE OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
THE GAZETTE OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA Part II of July 04, 03 SUPPLEMENT (Issued on 07.07.03) DEBT RECOVERY (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) (AMENDMENT) A BILL to amend the Debt Recovery (Special
More information2. The effect of a judgment passed in a criminal proceeding on a pending civil proceeding is the question involved herein.
Supreme Court of India Vishnu Dutt Sharma vs Daya Sapra on 5 May, 2009 Author: S Sinha Bench: S.B. Sinha, Mukundakam Sharma REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT. Crl. M.C.No. 4264/2011 & Crl.M.A /2011 (stay)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT Crl. M.C.No. 4264/2011 & Crl.M.A. 19640/2011 (stay) Decided on: 22nd February, 2012 SHORELINE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS LTD.
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl. MC No.867/2012 & Crl.MAs /2012 Date of Decision:
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl. MC No.867/2012 & Crl.MAs 3032-33/2012 Date of Decision: 09.04.2012 PAAM PHARMACEUTICALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Petitioner Through:
More informationAN ANALYTICAL STUDY ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IN NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 2017: A STEP TOWARDS DEVELOPMENT OF JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN INDIA
Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language, Online ISSN 2348-3083, SJ IMPACT FACTOR 2016 = 4.44, www.srjis.com UGC Approved Sr. No.48612, FEB-MAR 2018, VOL- 6/26 https://doi.org/10.21922/srjhsel.v6i26.11573
More informationA STUDY OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS IN INDIA SUMMARY
"'! A STUDY OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS IN INDIA A SUMMARY OF THESIS SUBMITTED TO MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN LAW Under the Supervision of:
More informationIN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COMPANY APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 181 of 2017
1 IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COMPANY APPELLATE JURISDICTION (Arising out of Order dated 27 th July, 2017 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai
More informationThrough: Versus. Through: 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + OMP No.552/2006 % Date of decision : 06.07.2009 Sh. Surender Pal Singh Through:. Petitioner Mr. Amit Bansal & Ms. Manisha Singh, Advocates for petitioner. Versus
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1449 OF M/s. Shankar Finance & Investments
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Reportable CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1449 OF 2003 M/s. Shankar Finance & Investments Appellant Versus State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors... Respondents
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Appellant : The Maharashtra State Seeds Corporation Limited,
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Appeal No. 195 of 2009 Appellant : The Maharashtra State Seeds Corporation Limited, through its District Manager Prasad Tukaram
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2642/2009
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 07 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR BETWEEN M/S PREETI IMPLEX REGD PARTNERSHIP FIRM BY ITS PARTNERS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl. M.C. No. 377/2010 & Crl. M.A. 1296/2010. Reserved on:18th May, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl. M.C. No. 377/2010 & Crl. M.A. 1296/2010 Reserved on:18th May, 2011 Decided on: 8th July, 2011 JAGMOHAN ARORA... Petitioner
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Co. Pet. 8/2015
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Co. Pet. 8/2015 Madhusudan Mandal, Residing at 35E Mahanirban Road, Ground Floor, Post Office- Gariahat, Kolkata-700029,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF 2017 M/S LION ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS VERSUS O R D E R
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA REPORTABLE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8984-8985 OF 2017 M/S LION ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF M.P. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) O R D
More informationNegotiable Instruments Act 1881
Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 Introduction The Negotiable Instruments Act was passed in 1881. Some provisions of the Act have become redundant due to passage of time, change in methods of doing business
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT. Date of Decision: CRL.A of 2013.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT Date of Decision: 06.03.2014 CRL.A. 1011 of 2013 S.K. JAIN... Appellant Mr. Ajay K. Chopra, Adv. versus VIJAY KALRA... Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 CRL.M.C. 5211/2006, CRL.M.C. 5217/2006 CRL.M.C. 5291/2006. CRL.M.C. 5211/2006 and CRL. M.A. No.8864/2006 Date of order
More informationThrough :Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Ms. Abhiruchi Arora, Mr. Akhil Sachar and Ms. Jaishree Shukla, Advs.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IA No. 16809/2010 (u/o 7 R 10 & 11 r/w Sec. 151 CPC) in CS(OS) No. 1830/2010 IA No. 16756/2010 (u/o 7 R 10 & 11 r/w Sec. 151 CPC)
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 20 OF Vs. DEVAS MULTIMEDIA P. LTD...
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 20 OF 2011 ANTRIX CORP. LTD....PETITIONER Vs. DEVAS MULTIMEDIA P. LTD....RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T ALTAMAS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE: THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.PACHHAPURE. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015 BEFORE: THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.PACHHAPURE CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.1045 OF 2014 BETWEEN: M/S BANGALORE ENTERPRISES
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment Reserved on: Judgment Pronounced on: versus -
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 30.11.2010 Judgment Pronounced on: 03.12.2010 + CS(OS) No. 241/2010 AJAY AHUJA & ANR... Plaintiff - versus - M/S SUBHIKSHA TRADING SERVICES
More informationNepc Micon Limited And Others vs Magma Leasing Limited on 29 April, 1999
Supreme Court of India Nepc Micon Limited And Others vs Magma Leasing Limited on 29 April, 1999 Author: Shah Bench: K.T.Thoms, M.B.Shah PETITIONER: NEPC MICON LIMITED AND OTHERS Vs. RESPONDENT: MAGMA LEASING
More informationLAW ON NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 C O N T E N T S
1 LAW ON NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 C O N T E N T S. S.S. Upadhyay Legal Advisor to Governor UP, Lucknow Mobile : 9453048988 E-mail : ssupadhyay28@gmail.com 1 Nature of Offence u/s 138 2 Demand Notice
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1590-1591 OF 2013 (@ Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Nos.6652-6653 of 2013) Anil Kumar & Ors... Appellants
More informationA FORTNIGHTLY VAT/GST LAW REPORTER 2003 NTN 22) [ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT]
2003 (Vol. 22) - 330 [ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] Hon'ble R.B. Misra, J. Trade Tax Revision No. 677 of 2000 M/s Rotomac Electricals Private Limited, Noida vs. Trade Tax Tribunal and others Date of Decision :
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO.(s) OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA REPORTABLE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.(s). 4011 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.31682 of 2011) MADHYA PRADESH RURAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 73 OF A.C. Narayanan... Appellant(s)
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 73 OF 2007 A.C. Narayanan... Appellant(s) Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr.... Respondent(s) WITH CRIMINAL
More informationRumi Dhar vs State Of West Bengal & Anr on 8 April, 2009 REPORTABLE. State of West Bengal and another
Supreme Court of India Author: S Sinha Bench: S.B. Sinha, Mukundakam Sharma REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 661 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE
1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon ble The Chief Justice Jyotirmay Bhattacharya. AND The Hon ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay. MAT 901 of 2016
More informationAIR(SC) 5384; ; JLJR(SC) 131; MPWN(SC) 138; ; SCC
This Product is Licensed to Mohammed Asif Ansari, Rajasthan State Judicial Academy, Jodhpur 2016 0 AIR(SC) 5384; 2016 4 Crimes(SC) 190; 2017 1 JLJR(SC) 131; 2016 3 MPWN(SC) 138; 2016 12 Scale 269; 2017
More informationJ U D G M E N T (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 5124/06) A.K. MATHUR, J.
Supreme Court of India State Of West Bengal vs Dinesh Dalmia on 25 April, 2007 Author: A Mathur Bench: A.K.Mathur, Tarun Chatterjee CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 623 of 2007 PETITIONER: State of West Bengal
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT, 1956 CRL.M.C. No. 179/2010 Judgment delivered on: 20th December, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT, 1956 CRL.M.C. No. 179/2010 Judgment delivered on: 20th December, 2011 MOHAN LAL & ANR.... Petitioner Through : Mr. N.K. Kaul, Sr. Adv. with
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: 31 st March, Versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 31 st March, 2016. + W.P.(C) No. 7359/2014 & CM No.17214/2014 (for stay) KUNAL CHAUHAN Through: Ms. Nandita Rao, Adv.... Petitioner Versus
More informationThrough: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Mr. Nitish Jain & Mr. Jatin Sethi, Advs. Versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Date of decision: 29th January, 2014 LPA 548/2013, CMs No.11737/2013 (for stay), 11739/2013 & 11740/2013 (both for condonation
More informationThe Applicability Of Amendments To Pending Arbitration Proceedings:
LEGAL UPDATE MAY-2018 The Applicability Of Amendments To Pending Arbitration Proceedings: The Supreme Court s Decision The long-standing debate with respect to the applicability of the amended provisions
More informationO.M THANKACHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA & ORS
O.M CHERIAN @ THANKACHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA & ORS REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2387 OF 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2487/2014) O.M.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl.M.C. 3710/2007. Date of decision: February 06, 2009.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl.M.C. 3710/2007 Date of decision: February 06, 2009 GEETIKA BATRA... Through : Petitioner Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sheel
More informationThrough: Mr. Himansu Upadhyay, Mr. J.P. Sahrawat and Mr. Shivam Tripathi, Advs. CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT CRL.M.C.No.4077/2011 & Crl.M.A.Nos.19016/2011 & 3720/2012 Judgment reserved on :26th March, 2012 Judgment delivered on: 2nd
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 483 OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 483 OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 4608 of 2016) RIPUDAMAN SINGH Petitioner(s) VERSUS BALKRISHNA Respondent(s)
More informationIN THE COURT OF SH. RAKESH KUMAR SINGH: METROPOLITAN MEGISTRATE (NI ACT)-1, CENTRAL: ROOM NO.-42, TIS HAZARI COURT COMPLEX, DELHI
1 IN THE COURT OF SH. RAKESH KUMAR SINGH: METROPOLITAN MEGISTRATE (NI ACT)-1, CENTRAL: ROOM NO.-42, TIS HAZARI COURT COMPLEX, DELHI T.B.S.L. vs. Jitesh Sharma CC No.1552/10 ORDER A criminal prosecution
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Negotiable Instruments Act. Judgement reserved on: January 07, 2009
(1) Crl.M.C. No. 3011/2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Negotiable Instruments Act Judgement reserved on: January 07, 2009 Judgement delivered on: January 13, 2009 (2) Crl.M.C. No.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Criminal Appeal Nos. 1048-1049 of 2011 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos. 5064-5065 of 2010), Criminal Appeal Nos. 1050-1052 of 2011 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 5112-5114
More informationCase No. 295 of Coram. Anand B. Kulkarni, Chairperson Mukesh Khullar, Member. Adani Power Maharashtra Limited (APML)
Before the MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION World Trade Centre, Centre No.1, 13th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Tel. 022 22163964/65/69 Fax 22163976 Email: mercindia@merc.gov.in Website:
More informationA TABOO ON THE SINGLE BENCH?
IS STARE DECISIS A TABOO ON THE SINGLE BENCH? By P.Chandrasekhar, Advocate, Ernakulam. Stare decisis is abbreviation of Latin phrase stare decisis et non quieta movere meaning that to stand by decisions
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD Special Civil Application No of 2015 AUTOMARK INDUSTRIES (I) LTD Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND 3 Harsha Deva
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD Special Civil Application No.13641 of 2015 AUTOMARK INDUSTRIES (I) LTD Vs STATE OF GUJARAT AND 3 Harsha Devani & A G Uraizee, JJ Appellants Rep by: Mr SN Soparkar,
More information2. Heard Sri Bhola Singh Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rishad Murtza, learned Government Advocate.
Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 3321 of 2012 Petitioner :- Iqbal And Anr. Respondent :- The State Of U.P Thru Home Secy., U.P Govt. Lucknow And Ors. Petitioner Counsel :- Bhola Singh Patel,Pravin Kumar Verma
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Criminal Petition No. 255 of 2010 Smt Roltong Singpho, Wife of Sri C C Singpho,
More informationChapter I - Sphere of application and form of the instrument
United Nations Convention on International Bills of Exchange and International Promissory Notes Chapter I - Sphere of application and form of the instrument Article 1 (1) This Convention applies to an
More informationNATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 154 of Mr. Senthil Kumar Karmegam
IN THE MATTER OF: NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI Mr. Senthil Kumar Karmegam...Appellant Vs. 1. Dolphin Offshore Enterprises (Mauritius) Pvt. Ltd. 2. Unison Engineering & Construction
More informationITEM NO.6 COURT NO.5 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS. Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s).
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.5 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s). 106/2015 FOUNDATION FOR MEDIA PROFESSIONALS THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, MR. MANOJ
More information$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus
$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1008/2013 KRISHAN LAL ARORA Through: Versus Date of Pronouncement: August 14, 2015... Plaintiff Dr. N. K. Khetarpal, Adv. GURBACHAN SINGH AND ORS...
More informationJUDGMENT (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No of 2005) ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
Supreme Court of India Bhupinder Singh & Ors vs Jarnail Singh & Anr on 13 July, 2006 Author: A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 757 of 2006 PETITIONER: Bhupinder Singh
More informationsas IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.59 OF 2011
1 cexa-59-11++ sas IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.59 OF 2011 M/s. Orange City Alloys Pvt. Ltd. ] (formerly M/s. Saggu Castings Pvt.
More information(ii) Raghuvir (B.) Acharya v. Central Bureau of Investigation
(ii) Raghuvir (B.) Acharya v. Central Bureau of Investigation... 132 CONTENTS Rajendra Nagar Adarsh Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.... 192 Aparna A. Shah (Mrs.) v. M/s. Sheth
More informationDIRECTORS NOT AUTOMATICALLY LIABLE FOR CHEQUE BOUNCE Prepared by S.Hemanth For suggestion and information please
DIRECTORS NOT AUTOMATICALLY LIABLE FOR CHEQUE BOUNCE Prepared by S.Hemanth For suggestion and information please e-mail hemanth@hemanthassociates.com In this article I am dealing with the liability of
More informationTHE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Criminal Petition 21 (AP)2017 Shri Nabam Epo, S/o Lt. Nabam Echo, R/o Tayang Tarang (Emchi) village,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2068 OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.10700 OF 2015) B. SUNITHA APPELLANT VERSUS THE
More informationMediation in Cheque Dishonour Cases : Legality and Binding effect.
Mediation in Cheque Dishonour Cases : Legality and Binding effect... Bharat Chugh (Civil Judge - Delhi) This article is an attempt to highlight a very important question of law facing magisterial courts
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5096/2015 & Crl.M.A /2015 Date of Decision : January 13 th, 2016.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5096/2015 & Crl.M.A. 18348/2015 Date of Decision : January 13 th, 2016 ANGLE INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD.... Petitioner Through Mr.Akhil Sibal,Ms.Bina Gupta,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl.M.C. 2053/2004. Reserved on :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Crl.M.C. 2053/2004 Reserved on : 29.01.2009 Date of decision :09.02.2009 R.P.MATHUR PROP. RADHIKA LEATHER FASHIONS PETITIONER
More information$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 30 th July, CRL.M.C. No.2836/2015. Versus
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 30 th July, 2015 + CRL.M.C. No.2836/2015 RAJ KAUSHAL Represented by:... Petitioner Mr. Imran Khan and Mr. Habibur Rehman, Advocates
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1395 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No of 2016] Versus
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1395 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3730 of 2016] REPORTABLE Anand Kumar Mohatta and Anr. State (Govt. of NCT of
More informationState Of A.P vs V. Sarma Rao & Ors. Etc. Etc on 10 November, 2006
Supreme Court of India State Of A.P vs V. Sarma Rao & Ors. Etc. Etc on 10 November, 2006 Author: S Sinha Bench: S.B. Sinha, Dalveer Bhandari CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 1136 of 2006 PETITIONER: State of A.P.
More informationBar & Bench (
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 14 OF 2019 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 5632 of 2014] NON REPORTABLE State of Madhya Pradesh.. Appellant Versus Kalyan
More information$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15 th February, CS(OS) 3324/2014
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15 th February, 2019. + CS(OS) 3324/2014 DEEPA BHURE & ORS... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, Advocate (9810270050) and petitioner
More informationI have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha,
TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI DATED 18 th JULY, 2011 Petition No. 275 (C) of 2009 Reliance Communications Limited.. Petitioner Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited..... Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CRIMINAL M.C. NO.3015 OF 2012 Decided on : 4th January, 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CRIMINAL M.C. NO.3015 OF 2012 Decided on : 4th January, 2013 KRANTA AAKASH @ PRAKASH KUMAR Through: Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate.
More informationMAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Before the MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION World Trade Centre, Centre No.1, 13th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005 Tel. No. 022 22163964/65/69 Fax 022 22163976 E-mail: mercindia@merc.gov.in
More information*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:11 th December, Through: Mr Rajat Aneja, Advocate. Versus AND. CM (M)No.
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM (M) No.331/2007 % Date of decision:11 th December, 2009 SMT. SAVITRI DEVI. Petitioner Through: Mr Rajat Aneja, Advocate. Versus SMT. GAYATRI DEVI & ORS....
More informationSupreme Court of India Arun Vyas & Anr vs Anita Vyas on 14 May, 1999 Author: J S.Shah Quadri Bench: K.Venkataswami, Syed Shah Quadri
Supreme Court of India Arun Vyas & Anr vs Anita Vyas on 14 May, 1999 Author: J S.Shah Quadri Bench: K.Venkataswami, Syed Shah Quadri PETITIONER: ARUN VYAS & ANR. Arun Vyas & Anr vs Anita Vyas on 14 May,
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Criminal Petition No. 359 of 2017 1. Sri Bijay Kumar Jalan, Son of Ramawatar Jalan, C/O Ganesh Narayan Gowardhan
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NDPS ACT. Date of Decision: November 13, W.P.(C).No.23810/2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NDPS ACT Date of Decision: November 13, 2006 W.P.(C).No.23810/2005 Ravi Sharma... PETITIONER Through: Mr.Harjinder Singh, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Vandana
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2686/2009
: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18 TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B BETWEEN: CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2686/2009 M.R.ACHUT KUMAR S/O M RAMAKRISHNA
More informationA.F.R. ***** This petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
1 Court No. - 25 Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 4136 of 2015 Applicant :- Arvind Kejriwal Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P And Ors. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahmood Alam,Mohd. Rijwan Khan Counsel for
More informationCONTENTS. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, Preamble
CONTENTS Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 Sections Preamble 1. Short title, extent and application 2. Interpretation 3. Submission of draft standing orders 4. Conditions for certification
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2467/2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgement delivered on: 2 nd December, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2467/2015 PRADIP BURMAN Represented by: Versus... Petitioner Mr. S. Ganesh, Senior Advocate with Mr.
More information