Search Results for "dealer selection guidelines"

26 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 26 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Considers Validity of Designation of Senior Advocates Without Framed Rules Under Advocates Act, 1961. Petitioners Seek to Quash Notifications and Require High Court to Frame Rules for Designation of Senior Advocates.

These writ petitions were filed in public interest by two advocates practicing in the High Court of Karnataka, challenging notifications dated 30.06.2...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court of India: Judgment on Regulation and Approval of Genetically Modified Crops. Ensuring adherence to environmental safety, legal standards, and public health in the approval process for GM crops in India.

The Supreme Court of India concerning various writ petitions filed in public interest related to the regulation and approval of Genetically Modified (...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Hears Petitions Challenging Tender and Work Orders in Cooperative Milk Marketing. Petitions Filed by Warehousing Agent and Co-Packer Against Karnataka Cooperative Milk Federation and Its Unions Alleging Breach of Exclusive Contracts for Telangana Operations.

Background: The case involved two writ petitions filed before the High Court of Karnataka challenging certain actions of the Karnataka Co-operative Mi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Excise Duty on Rubber Users Under the Rubber Act, 1947. Levy Valid as Excise Duty on Production Can Be Collected from Users and Act Contains Sufficient Policy Guidance Against Excessive Delegation.

The case involved a challenge by Jullundur Rubber Goods Manufacturers’ Association, an association of rubber chappal manufacturers in Jullundur, Pun...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Allows Appeal for Enhanced Compensation in Motor Accident Claim Case Due to Inadequate Assessment of Income and Future Prospects. Claimant awarded Rs. 11 lakhs instead of Rs. 3.12 lakhs under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The appellant, Dharmendarasinh Chandarasinh Jadeja, filed a First Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment a...