citedby: 106979

1 - 5 of 5 (2.01 seconds)

Documents citing The State Of Maharashtra vs Sevantilal Jasanglal Shah on 6 October, 1977

The State Of Maharashtra vs Pragyasinh Chandrapalsinh Thakur And ... on 19 July, 2010

9. The constitutional validity of the MCOC Act and more particularly the provisions of Section 2(1)(d), (e) and (f) and Sections 3, 4 and 13 to 16 as well as Section 21(5) has been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Bharat Shantilal ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:09:55 ::: 20 Shah and ors. [(2008) 13 SCC 5]. The constitutional validity of all these provisions has been upheld and the words "or under any other Act" from Section 21(5) of the said Act were struck down.

Bombay High Court Cites 75 - Cited by 0 - B H Marlapalle - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra vs Pragyasinh Chandrapalsinh Thakur And ... on 19 July, 2010

9. The constitutional validity of the MCOC Act and more particularly the provisions of Section 2(1)(d), (e) and (f) and Sections 3, 4 and 13 to 16 as well as Section 21(5) has been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Bharat Shantilal ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:09:42 ::: 20 Shah and ors. [(2008) 13 SCC 5]. The constitutional validity of all these provisions has been upheld and the words "or under any other Act" from Section 21(5) of the said Act were struck down.

Bombay High Court Cites 75 - Cited by 1 - B H Marlapalle - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra vs Pragyasinh Chandrapalsinh Thakur And ... on 19 July, 2010

9. The constitutional validity of the MCOC Act and more particularly the provisions of Section 2(1)(d), (e) and (f) and Sections 3, 4 and 13 to 16 as well as Section 21(5) has been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Bharat Shantilal ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:09:51 ::: 20 Shah and ors. [(2008) 13 SCC 5]. The constitutional validity of all these provisions has been upheld and the words "or under any other Act" from Section 21(5) of the said Act were struck down.

Bombay High Court Cites 75 - Cited by 0 - B H Marlapalle - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra vs Pragyasinh Chandrapalsinh Thakur And ... on 19 July, 2010

9. The constitutional validity of the MCOC Act and more particularly the provisions of Section 2(1)(d), (e) and (f) and Sections 3, 4 and 13 to 16 as well as Section 21(5) has been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Bharat Shantilal ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:09:45 ::: 20 Shah and ors. [(2008) 13 SCC 5]. The constitutional validity of all these provisions has been upheld and the words "or under any other Act" from Section 21(5) of the said Act were struck down.

Bombay High Court Cites 75 - Cited by 0 - B H Marlapalle - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra vs Pragyasinh Chandrapalsinh Thakur And ... on 19 July, 2010

9. The constitutional validity of the MCOC Act and more particularly the provisions of Section 2(1)(d), (e) and (f) and Sections 3, 4 and 13 to 16 as well as Section 21(5) has been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Bharat Shantilal ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:09:48 ::: 20 Shah and ors. [(2008) 13 SCC 5]. The constitutional validity of all these provisions has been upheld and the words "or under any other Act" from Section 21(5) of the said Act were struck down.

Bombay High Court Cites 75 - Cited by 0 - B H Marlapalle - Full Document

1