Search Results for "quash endorsement"

627 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 627 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Passes Order in Writ Petition by Company Challenging Rejection of Application Under Industrial Park Scheme, 2002. Petitioner's Application Dated 15.12.2006 Under IPS 2002 Was Rejected on Ground That Scheme Expired on 31.03.2006.

The petitioner, a private limited company, proposed to set up an industrial park named 'Salarpuria Touch Stone' in Bangalore under a Joint Development...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Sub-Registrar's Refusal to Delete Agreement of Sale Entry from Encumbrance Certificate. Sub-Registrar Has No Power to Make Entries of Unregistered Agreements of Sale Under Registration Act, 1908, and Cannot Refuse Deletion.

The petitioner, Ramesh Timmanna Umarani, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

KAHC010064292023_1

The writ petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the report of the District Caste Verification Committe...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition of Company in Stamp Duty Adjudication Case — Holds Adjudication Under Section 31 of Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 Final and Binding. Reopening of Adjudication After 20 Years Under Section 53A Is Without Jurisdiction and Barred by Delay.

The petitioner, Hindustan Unilever Ltd., filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court challenging...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Tahsildar's Endorsement Refusing Mutation in Land Revenue Dispute — Petitioners' Title and Possession Upheld Despite Alleged Government Land. Mutation Entry Does Not Confer Title; Tahsildar Must Hear Parties Before Refusing Mutation Under Karnataka Land Revenue Act.

The petitioners, Smt. R. Suguna and Siddarth Sarnaik, purchased 8 acres of land in Sy.No.42 of Navarathna Agrahara, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under COFEPOSA Act Due to Non-Application of Mind and Non-Supply of Relevant Documents. Detenu's Right to Make Effective Representation Under Article 22(5) of Constitution Violated.

The petitioner, brother of the detenu, challenged the detention order dated 2nd April 2009 passed by respondent no.2 under Section 3(1) of the Conserv...