Amrit Banaspati Company Ltd vs State Of Punjab And Another on 7 August, 2015
Author
contrary to the
rule of law, would violate Article 14. Justice R.F. Nariman speaking for
majority has concluded as below:
28 of 44
::: Downloaded
Central
Excise, 2016(3) SCC 643 wherein, speaking through Justice R.F.
Nariman, the following was observed:
"28. Shri Aggarwal in order to buttress
Central
Excise, 2016(3) SCC 643 wherein, speaking through Justice R.F.
Nariman, the following was observed:
"28. Shri Aggarwal in order to buttress
Central
Excise, 2016(3) SCC 643 wherein, speaking through Justice R.F.
Nariman, the following was observed:
"28. Shri Aggarwal in order to buttress
Central
Excise, 2016(3) SCC 643 wherein, speaking through Justice R.F.
Nariman, the following was observed:
"28. Shri Aggarwal in order to buttress
Ispat Private Limited
(2021) 6 SCC 258 wherein speaking through Justice R.F. Nariman, it was
observed as under:-
"53. A perusal of this
Ispat Private
Limited (2021) 6 SCC 258 wherein speaking through Justice R.F. Nariman, it
was observed as under:-
"53. A perusal of this
Tamil Nadu , 2021(1)
RCR(Criminal) 1, speaking through Justice R.F. Nariman, has held as
follows:-
"57. On the basis of the reasoning
India
(NHAI ), [2019] 15 SCC 131, speaking for the Bench, Justice
R.F. Nariman has spelt out the contours of the limited scope
of judicial