Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.79 seconds)

Rajammal vs State Of Tamil Nadu And Another on 14 December, 1998

8.In Rajammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in 1999(1)SCC 417, the Apex Court has held that the representation was received by the Secretary to the Government on 05.02.1998, the Government which received the remarks from different authorities submitted the relevant files before the under Secretary for processing it on the next day. Thereafter, the files were submitted to the Minister, who received it on tour. Finding that there was no valid explanation for the delay from 09.02.1998 to 14.02.1998, the Apex Court held that the delay has vitiated the detention.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 2263 - Full Document

Jayanarayan Sukul vs State Of West Bengal on 5 November, 1969

9.After extracting the ratio decided in Jayanarayan Sukul Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 1970 (1)SCC 219 Mahesh KUmar Chauhan alias Banti Vs. Union of India reported in 1990(3) SCC 148 and Rama Dhondu Borade Vs. V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police reported in 1989 (3) SCC 173, a Division Bench of this Court in Ramamurthy Vs., the State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St., George, Chennai - 600 009 and another reported in 2006(4) CTC 181 in paragraph 4 of the decision has held as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 472 - A N Ray - Full Document

Mahesh Kumar Chauhan @ Banti vs Union Of India And Ors on 2 May, 1990

9.After extracting the ratio decided in Jayanarayan Sukul Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 1970 (1)SCC 219 Mahesh KUmar Chauhan alias Banti Vs. Union of India reported in 1990(3) SCC 148 and Rama Dhondu Borade Vs. V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police reported in 1989 (3) SCC 173, a Division Bench of this Court in Ramamurthy Vs., the State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St., George, Chennai - 600 009 and another reported in 2006(4) CTC 181 in paragraph 4 of the decision has held as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 241 - S R Pandian - Full Document

Rama Dhondu Borade vs V.K. Saraf, Commissioner Of Police & Ors on 5 May, 1989

9.After extracting the ratio decided in Jayanarayan Sukul Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 1970 (1)SCC 219 Mahesh KUmar Chauhan alias Banti Vs. Union of India reported in 1990(3) SCC 148 and Rama Dhondu Borade Vs. V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police reported in 1989 (3) SCC 173, a Division Bench of this Court in Ramamurthy Vs., the State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St., George, Chennai - 600 009 and another reported in 2006(4) CTC 181 in paragraph 4 of the decision has held as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 280 - S R Pandian - Full Document

S.V. Ramamurthy vs The Secretary To Government Of Tamil ... on 28 April, 2006

9.After extracting the ratio decided in Jayanarayan Sukul Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 1970 (1)SCC 219 Mahesh KUmar Chauhan alias Banti Vs. Union of India reported in 1990(3) SCC 148 and Rama Dhondu Borade Vs. V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police reported in 1989 (3) SCC 173, a Division Bench of this Court in Ramamurthy Vs., the State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St., George, Chennai - 600 009 and another reported in 2006(4) CTC 181 in paragraph 4 of the decision has held as follows:
Madras High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 152 - A P Shah - Full Document
1   2 Next