Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.45 seconds)
Documents citing Suresh Kumar @ Bobby Son Of Madan Lal vs State Of Punjab ---Respondent on 11 November, 2010

O.P. Mahajan vs State Of Punjab on 17 October, 2018

Since the allegations in both the cases are of similar nature, a series of transactions during the course of same very events, there ought to be one FIR rather than another FIR coming out and digressing for what is there at the very onset of the investigations leading to the registration and investigations in the first case. This Court seeks support from Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah's case (ibid) relied by Mr.Preetinder Singh Ahluwalia for the defence; 'Hardeep Singh's case and 'Suo Motu vs. State of Gujarat' (ibid) for which support has been taken on behalf of his client by Mr.A.P.S. Deol; 'N. Ratnakumari vs. State of Odisha' (ibid); 'B. Muthuraman @ Balesubavramanian 58 of 74 ::: Downloaded on - 10-11-2018 22:32:01 ::: CRA-S-3958-SB of 2013 (O&M) & five other appeals 59 Muthuraman vs. State of Jharkhand' (ibid); 'Suresh Kumar @ Bobby vs. State of Punjab' (ibid); 'M/s Pepsico India Holdings (Pvt.) Limited vs. State of U.P.'
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 104 - Cited by 0 - F D Singh - Full Document

Jeet Singh @ Satish Chand & Ors. vs . Uoi & Anr. Page 1 Of 18 on 20 November, 2018

30.  Petitioners in support of their claim for enhancement of the   compensation   amount,   primarily   relied   on   different judgments   passed   by   the   Hon'ble   High   Court   as   well   as   the Learned   Predecessor   Judges.   At   the   time   of   addressing   final Jeet Singh @ Satish Chand & Ors. vs. UOI & Anr. Page 13 of 18 LAC No.19/2016 arguments, Learned counsel for the petitioners filed a judgment passed   by   the   court   of   Sh.   Lalit   Kumar,   ADJ­01,   South­east District, Saket Courts, New Delhi pertaining to the acquired land of   Village   Jasola   vide   Award   No.21/1992­93   bearing  LAC No.39/2014 titled as Madan Lal vs. UOI & Ors. Respondent No.1 on the other hand only relied on the Award passed by the LAC as R1/1.
Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh. Ajit Singh vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 30 January, 2013

In the w/s the defendant has taken the preliminary objection that plaintiff has not come to the court with the clean hands and concealed the material facts that an order U/s 133 Cr.PC dt. 7.8.01 thereafter CR. no. 19/01 titled Sukh Lal Maan Vs. State vide orders dt. 27.10.01 was passed wherein it is clearly held that Sukh Lal Maan made encroachment on the govt. land . Thereafter in criminal M.No 222/02 hon'ble High Court vide orders dt. 29.11.02 dismissed the petition of Sukhlal Maan and from the memo of parties it is revealed that Sukhlal Maan was the father of Ajit Singh i.e. plaintiff.
Delhi District Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1