Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.70 seconds)

Aswani Kumar & Ors vs . State on 24 July, 2010

Rules, 1955 because the sample showed the presence of argemone oil. It was a partnership firm comprising of three partners. It had purchased the said ... public analyst is not a sure test. No percentage of argemone oil was given in both the reports ; there was no prohibition of argemone
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Lha vs Mahesh Kumar on 3 May, 2010

argued that as per the report of the Public Analyst, test for Argemone oil was found 'negative' but as per report ... Director, CFL , test for Argemone oil was found 'positive' in the counterpart of the same sample, which is indicative of the fact that
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Da vs Jai Pal Jain & Others on 27 January, 2010

Rules, 1955, because the sample shows the presence of argemone oil. 3. After the conclusion of the investigation, the entire case file including the statutory ... sample does not conform to the standards as it shows presence of argemone oil but no argemone oil was found by the Director
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Da vs Sant Lal & Others on 16 January, 2010

Appendix B of PFA Rules, 1955 because sample shows presence of Argemone oil. 3. After the conclusion of the investigation, the entire case file including ... sample does not conform to the standards as it shows presence of argemone oil but no argemone oil was found by the Director
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Da vs Arvind Kumar on 13 January, 2010

Appendix B of PFA Rules, 1955 because sample shows presence of argemone oil. 3. After the conclusion of the investigation, the entire case file including ... sample does not conform to the standards as it shows presence of argemone oil but no argemone oil was found by the Director
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next