Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 346 (0.80 seconds)
Documents citing Nawal Kishore Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors on 7 August, 2014

M/S Utoll Corporation Ltd vs The National Highways Authorit on 11 December, 2017

27. The Division Bench of this Court has decided the matter in the case of Nawal Kishore Sharma v. Union of India, which matter went up to the Apex Court and was decided in (2014) 9 SCC 329. Paragraphs 18 and 19 of the said judgment clearly state that after the Court had entertained the application and passed interim orders, the writ petition ought not to have been dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction.
Patna High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - A Mishra - Full Document

Dr. Reddys Laboratories Limited & Anr. vs The Controller Of Patents & Ors. on 10 November, 2022

84. It is the settled position in law that an appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings.1 Under Section 117A of the Act, appeals are maintainable from any decision, order or direction made or issued under the Act either by the Central Government or from the orders of the Controller. If the appeal is against any decision, order or direction of the Central Government, the same would then be governed by the general principles of 1 M/S Ramnath Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. Vinita Mehta & Anr., (2022) 7 SCC 678; Malluru Mallappa v. Kuruvathappa and Others, (2020) 4 SCC 313; Hindustan Petroleum Corp. v. Dilbahar Singh (2014) 9 SCC 78; M/s Diamcad NV v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs OA/4/2009/PT/CH Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed C.O. (COMM.IPD-PAT) 3/2021& connected matters Page 52 of 76 By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:10.11.2022 18:22:46 2022/DHC/004746 law as laid down in the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd. v Union of India (supra) and subsequent decisionsin Mosaraf Hossain Khan v. Bhageeratha Engg. Ltd. (2006) 3 SCC 658andNawal Kishore Sharma v. Union of India AIR 2014 SC 3607.
Delhi High Court Cites 102 - Cited by 1 - P M Singh - Full Document

Gummadi Nageswara Rao vs The State Of Andra Pradesh, on 5 July, 2022

(ii) This Court also agrees with the submission of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner who relied upon the case of Nawal Kishore Sharma v. Union of India and others (1 supra). Admittedly, both the letters which are subject matter of the challenge 11 and by which the petitioner's request was negatived were addressed to him at Eluru in West Godavari District, which is within the jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, a fraction or part of the cause of action has arisen within the State of Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, this Court has the territorial jurisdiction to hear and decide this lis.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - P K Mishra - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next