Calibre Chemicals vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 24 December, 1996
Interpretation by High Court or the Supreme Court Judgment is binding on us (Amruta v. Kondabai - AIR 1994 Bom. 293).
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 55 (0.78 seconds)Shankar Sundaram vs Amalgamations Ltd. on 18 October, 2000
Referring to Amruta Babaji Mozar v. Kondabai (AIR 1994 Bom. 293), he pointed out that the law declared by the High Court, right or wrong, is binding on all courts and Tribunals in the State and since CLB
has all India jurisdiction, it is bound by the decisions of the High Court cited earlier.
Kiran S/O Narhari Wattamwar vs The Collector on 7 May, 2012
26 In the instant matter, however, by application of principle
laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Sadashiv H. Patil
(cited supra), it needs to be concluded that neither Shri B.R.Kedar,
District President of Congress (I) party nor Shri Suryawanshi, leader of
the municipal party, are successful in pointing out authorisation in their
favour to issue whip / directives. In the absence of specific
authorisation in favour of the persons issuing directives, such directives
cannot be held to be binding on the members.
Kiran S/O Narhari Wattamwar vs The Collector on 7 May, 2012
26 In the instant matter, however, by application of principle
laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Sadashiv H. Patil
(cited supra), it needs to be concluded that neither Shri B.R.Kedar,
District President of Congress (I) party nor Shri Suryawanshi, leader of
the municipal party, are successful in pointing out authorisation in their
favour to issue whip / directives. In the absence of specific
authorisation in favour of the persons issuing directives, such directives
cannot be held to be binding on the members.
Gajanan S/O. Subhashrao Suryawanshi vs Kiran Narhari Wattamwar on 23 August, 2013
In the instant matter, however,
by application of principle laid down by
the Supreme Court in the matter of
Sadashiv H. Patil (cited supra), it
needs to be concluded that neither Shri
B.R.Kadam, District President of
Congress (I) party nor Shri Suryawanshi,
leader of the municipal party, are
successful in pointing out authorisation
in their favour to issue whip /
directives. In the absence of specific
authorisation in favour of the persons
issuing directives, such directives
cannot be held to be binding on the
members
ig .
Dr. Sunil Kumar Kar vs State Of Odisha And Others. ... Opp. ... on 14 August, 2013
15. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Amruta Babaji
Mozar v. Kondabai, deceased by her heirs Babai Laxman Mandhare etc
and another , AIR 1994 Bombay-293 held that the law declared by the
Supreme Court is no doubt of paramount precedence and is binding on all
the Courts notwithstanding any decision to the contrary of the High Court to
which a Court may be subordinate. This would have been the position even
without Article 141 of the Constitution because of the precedent-oriented
system of judicial administration received by us from the Britishers and
followed by us with utmost devotional rigidity.
Unknown vs Aicte on 6 September, 2013
The Bombay High Court in the case of Amruta
Babaji Mozar v. Kondabai, deceased by her heirs Babai
Laxman Mandhare etc and another , AIR 1994 Bombay-
M/S Lokmat Media Private Limited, ... vs Vijay S/O Krushanrao Pawar on 4 May, 2018
He referred to the
judgment in Amruta Babaji Mozar Vs. Kondabai Babaji Mozar &
another [1994 Mh.L.J. 1663] to urge that when the High Court
considers a decision of the Supreme Court and puts its own gloss
thereon, that gloss was binding on all the Courts in the State until it
was outweighed by a later decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court or of
the High Court.
Dipak Shankarrao Labde vs M/S Lokmat Media Private Limited, ... on 4 May, 2018
He referred to the
judgment in Amruta Babaji Mozar Vs. Kondabai Babaji Mozar &
another [1994 Mh.L.J. 1663] to urge that when the High Court
considers a decision of the Supreme Court and puts its own gloss
thereon, that gloss was binding on all the Courts in the State until it
was outweighed by a later decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court or of
the High Court.
Pravin Diwakar Mendhi vs M/S Lokmat Media Private Limited, ... on 4 May, 2018
He referred to the
judgment in Amruta Babaji Mozar Vs. Kondabai Babaji Mozar &
another [1994 Mh.L.J. 1663] to urge that when the High Court
considers a decision of the Supreme Court and puts its own gloss
thereon, that gloss was binding on all the Courts in the State until it
was outweighed by a later decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court or of
the High Court.