Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.94 seconds)
Documents citing Divisional Manager, Aravali Golf Club & ... vs Chander Hass & Anr on 6 December, 2007

Ashish Sharma And Others vs State And Anr. on 23 October, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised CRMC No.599/2018 Page 8 of 10 repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Noor Hussain And Ors. vs State And Ors. on 12 November, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rinkash Singh Rakwal vs State And Another on 19 November, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Vikram Sodhi vs State And Another on 14 December, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf CRMC No.555/2018 Page 9 of 10 Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Gurcharan Singh & Ors. vs State And Anr. on 17 December, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Lakhbir Kour And Ors. vs State Of J&K; on 17 December, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Anita Sharma And Ors. vs State Of J&K; on 19 December, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Niva Sinha And Ors. vs State And Anr. on 21 December, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Sahil Kumar And Anr. vs State And Ors. on 28 December, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As CRMC No.123/2018 Page 8 of 9 observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document

Sanjeev Sharma And Ors. vs State And Another on 28 December, 2018

"21. Ordinarily, we would have agreed with Mr. B.B. Singh. The doctrine of judicial restraint which has been emphasised repeatedly by this Court e.g. in Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass (2008) 1 SCC 683 and Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi (2008) 4 SCC 720, restricts the power of the Court and does not permit the Court to ordinarily encroach into the legislative or executive domain. As observed by this Court in the above decisions, there is a broad separation of powers in the Constitution and it would not be proper for one organ of the State to encroach into the domain of another organ."
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S K Gupta - Full Document
1   2 Next