Hareshbhai vs Surat
Judges:
20 June, 2012·1. Heard Mr. A.J. Shastri, learned Advocate appearing with Mr. Vishal Mehta, for the petitioner and Mr. Kaushal D. Pandya for the respondent Corporation.2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has interalia challenged the notice under section 260(1)(...
High Court Of Gujarat
Indo vs Regional
Judges:
20 June, 2012·From the note dated 21.3.2011 prepared by the Registry and placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice, it appears that on 30.3.2011, Hon'ble the Chief Justice passed order directing the Registry to place the matter before the Court taking up matters under the Companies Act. The Registry may take necess...
High Court Of Gujarat
Mal vs Gujarat
Judges:
20 June, 2012·Learned counsel for the petitioner states that by efflux of time the present petition has become infructuous.In view of the above, the present petition stands disposed of as having become infructuous. Rule is discharged. Liberty to revive in case of difficulty.(K.S.JHAVERI,J.) pawan Top...
High Court Of Gujarat
Commissioner vs M. Sahai
Judges:
20 June, 2012·(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI) We have heard Mr. M. R. Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant - revenue.ADMIT.We formulate the following substantial question of law which arises in this appeal as under :-"Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in set...
High Court Of Gujarat
Dhirubhai vs Ms Varsha Brahmbhatt For Ms Kj ...
Judges:
20 June, 2012·[1] The present Appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is filed by the appellant - State of Gujarat against the Judgment and order dated 04.07.1997 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surendranagar, in Sessions Case No. 5 of 1993, whereby the learned Judge has acquitte...
High Court Of Gujarat
Nandlalbhai vs Chief
Judges:
20 June, 2012·Instead of proceeding with the hearing, though reply affidavit has been filed by respondent, learned counsel for the petitioner has requested for time to file rejoinder in response to the reply affidavit filed by the respondent company since 11.06.2012.He has submitted that another petition similar ...
High Court Of Gujarat
Pallaviben vs Mehulkumar
Judges:
20 June, 2012·This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order of the trial court where by instead of considering the request of condoning the delay of 20 days in preferring the petition, the court has decided the matter on merit.Learned...
High Court Of Gujarat
Gaurangbhai vs State
Judges:
20 June, 2012·When matter was called out learned APP was not present. Learned advocate Mr.Gondalia appearing for the respondent No. 2 has place on record compromise as the communication address to the Police Commissioner and the original plaintiff. He also place on record copy of the affidavit filed by the compla...
High Court Of Gujarat
State vs Ashwinkumar
Judges:
20 June, 2012·1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order passed by the Gujarat Affiliated Colleges Services Tribunal, Ahmedabad [for short "the Tribunal"] in Application No. 74 of 1992, dated 25.02.2011, whereby the said application was allowed with a direction to grant...
High Court Of Gujarat
National vs Kanubhai
Judges:
20 June, 2012·The endorsement on the board indicates that the notices issued to respondent Nos.1 and 2 have not been received back, either served or unserved. The Registry to await service of notices upon the said respondents. List the matter on 05.07.2012.In the meanwhile, no coercive action shall be taken again...
High Court Of Gujarat
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.