Search Results for "Ejusdem Generis"

136 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 136 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Against Industrial Court Order Dismissing Revision as Time-Barred. Limitation for Revision Under Section 44 of MRTU & PULP Act is Governed by Article 137 of Limitation Act, Not Article 113.

The petitioners, employees of the Irrigation Project, Ratnagiri, were appointed as River Gauge Readers and Rain Gauge Readers and worked from 1979 to ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Challenging Dismissal of Revision Applications as Time-Barred Under MRTU & PULP Act. Limitation for Revision under Section 44 is Governed by Article 137 of Limitation Act, Not Article 113.

The petitioners, employees of the Irrigation Project, Ratnagiri, were appointed as River Gauge Readers and Rain Gauge Readers between 1979 and 1991. T...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Rejection of Order VII Rule 11 CPC Application in Election Petition — Application Filed After Issues Framed Held to Be Delaying Tactic. The court upheld the trial court's order imposing costs for protracting the election petition.

The petitioner, Prakash Devji More, was elected as a Councillor of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) on 23/02/2017. The respondent No...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Royalty Demand on Excavated Material from Development Site. Tahsildar lacks jurisdiction to levy royalty under Section 48 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 for excavation during construction pursuant to valid development permission.

The petitioner, Paranjape Schemes (Construction) Ltd., a company engaged in real estate development, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Cour...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Tahsildar's Demand for Royalty on Excavated Material During Construction. Held that Tahsildar lacks jurisdiction to levy royalty on material excavated pursuant to valid development permission under MRTP Act and NA permission under MLR Code.

The petitioner, originally Flagship Infrastructure Pvt Ltd and now Paranjape Schemes (Construction) Limited, filed a writ petition challenging a show ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Quashing Tahsildar's Order Levying Royalty on Excavated Material for Construction. Section 48 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 Does Not Empower Tahsildar to Levy Royalty on Material Excavated for Building Foundation or Plinth.

The petitioner, P.S.C. Pacific, a registered partnership firm, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 11/8/2010...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Failure to Prove Age of Victim. Conviction under Sections 354, 363, 342 IPC and Section 8 POCSO Act set aside as prosecution failed to establish victim was a child under POCSO Act.

The appellant, Satish s/o Bandu Ragde, was convicted by the Extra Joint Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Special Child Protection Case No. 28 of ...