Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.34 seconds)The Indian Contract Act, 1872
Section 3 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 182 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Abdulla Ahmed vs Animendra Kissen Mitter on 14 March, 1950
In Addulla Ahmed v. Animendra Kissen Mitter A.I.R. 1950 S.C. 15, Mahajan, J., (as he then was) observed that the first thing to see is what the parties have expressed in the commission note and what is the true effect of the language employed in it, read in the light of the material facts.
Kandula Radhakrishna Rao And Ors. vs The Province Of Madras Represented By ... on 16 November, 1951
This decision was followed by a Full Bench of the Madras High Court in Kandula Radhakrishna Rao and Ors. v. The Province of Madras [1952] 3 S.T.C. 121 and a Division Bench of the Mysore High Court in Bagalkot Cement Co. Ltd. v. State of Mysore [1970] 25 S.T.C 520.
Section 9 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Bagalkot Cement Co., Limited vs State Of Mysore on 26 February, 1970
This decision was followed by a Full Bench of the Madras High Court in Kandula Radhakrishna Rao and Ors. v. The Province of Madras [1952] 3 S.T.C. 121 and a Division Bench of the Mysore High Court in Bagalkot Cement Co. Ltd. v. State of Mysore [1970] 25 S.T.C 520.
1