Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 96 (0.91 seconds)
Documents citing Suresh vs Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava And Anr on 16 February, 2005

Govind Singh vs State & Anr on 20 March, 2009

In the case of Suresh vs. Mahadevappa ( supra) and in other judgments it has been observed that at 14 the time of taking cognizance, Magistrate should have perused and considered the material collected during investigation, but as discussed above, in this case the learned Magistrate has discussed that material in his order before taking cognizance. Thus, those judgments do not help their contentions.
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 14 - Cited by 1 - M L Mohta - Full Document

Shri Ramesh Kisanrao Kothale vs State Of Maharashtra Through Police ... on 3 September, 2007

In [Suresh v. Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava and Anr.] the Apex Court had considered the delay in lodging the complaint and dispute being of civil nature. However, in that case, there was absence of ingredients of the alleged offence of cheating. Here the allegation against the applicant is that he had furnished false documents to get grants. If this is so, it appears to be fraudulent and dishonest intention on the part of the applicant to get these grants though not entitled and therefore, it can not be said that merely because the applicant has re-couped the excess grants with penalty, he had no fraudulent intention or dishonest intention while claiming those grants. In my opinion, delay in lodging the charge sheet which in this case appears to be only after the matter was considered by the Division Bench of this Court, can not lead to the quashing of the same.
Bombay High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - S R Dongaonkar - Full Document

Rajesh Kumar Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 April, 2024

8. Admittedly, the role of the petitioners was there with regard to the purchasing of the land which was of the year 2007. However, the present complaint case has been field in the year 2017 and in view of that the case of the petitioners is fully covered in view of the two of the Suresh Vs. Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava and another (Supra) and the case of Prof. R.K. Vijayasarthy and Another Vs. Sudhar Seetharam and another (Supra) relied by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S K Dwivedi - Full Document

Ganesh Benzoplast Limited Through ... vs Morgan Securities Credits Private ... on 26 April, 2021

7 The Superintendent & Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal 14/34 ::: Uploaded on - 26/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2021 19:45:04 ::: ssm 15 wp127.20gp-final.doc Vs. S.K. Roy, MANU/SC/0229/1974 : AIR 1974 SC 794; 8 GHCL Employees Stock Option Trust Vs. India Infoline Ltd., MANU/SC/0271/2013 : AIR 2013 SC 1433; 9 Sushil Sethi & Ors. Vs. The State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors., MANU/SC/0119/2020 : AIR 2020 SC 765; 10 Suresh Vs. Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava & Ors., MANU/SC/0110/2005 : AIR 2005 SC 1047. 10.3) Mr. Ponda further submitted that, it is well settled that, every
Bombay High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - A S Gadkari - Full Document

Ganesh Benzoplast Limited Through ... vs Meera Goyal And Anr on 26 April, 2021

7 The Superintendent & Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal 14/34 ::: Uploaded on - 26/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2021 19:45:32 ::: ssm 15 wp127.20gp-final.doc Vs. S.K. Roy, MANU/SC/0229/1974 : AIR 1974 SC 794; 8 GHCL Employees Stock Option Trust Vs. India Infoline Ltd., MANU/SC/0271/2013 : AIR 2013 SC 1433; 9 Sushil Sethi & Ors. Vs. The State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors., MANU/SC/0119/2020 : AIR 2020 SC 765; 10 Suresh Vs. Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava & Ors., MANU/SC/0110/2005 : AIR 2005 SC 1047. 10.3) Mr. Ponda further submitted that, it is well settled that, every
Bombay High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - A S Gadkari - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next