Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

supra). (42) Lastly, the learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Deepak Sibal Vs. Punjab University, Jt 1989 (Supp.) S.C. 2. That case pertains

forbid reasonable classification. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in Deepak Sibal vs. Punjab Univensity, to make it permissible under Article 14 the classification

reported in Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh v. Sanjay Gulati and Others , , Deepak Sibal v. Punjab University & Another , , Sonu Balhara v. Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak

also referred to paras 14 & 20 of Deepak Sibal Vs. Punjab University & Anr. which read as under:- "Para 14: It is difficult

2021. 7. Mr. Varma, Mr. Sibal, Mr. Sai Deepak and Mr. Sushant Singh contend that these matters should be listed before the Division Bench ... contends that accepting the stand canvassed by Mr. Varma, Mr. Sai Deepak, Mr. Sibal and Mr. Singh, would result in denying, to the petitioners

Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar2 , paras 9, 14, 31 and 32 of Deepak 1 (2019) 20 SCC 117 2 1952 SCC Online 1 Signature ... made arbitrarily and without any substantial basis". Para 9 of Deepak Sibal reiterates the same principle. Paras 31 and 32 are merely the concluding

Lakshmanan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1996) 2 SCC 226, Deepak Sibal Vs. Punjab University (1989) 2 SCC 145, Sharma Transport Vs. Govt. of Andhra

submission, he relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Deepak Sibal & Ors. vs. Punjab University ... AIIMS." (Emphasis supplied) 9. The judgment in Deepak Sibal & Ors. vs. Punjab University & Anr. (supra) has no application to the facts

Appellant through Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Akhil Sibal, Mr. Deepak Khurana & Mr. Pradeep Chhindra, Advs. versus IndoChine India Ltd. ......Respondent

VENTURES PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Kapil Sibal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Akhil Sibal, Mr. Deepak Khurana and Mr. Jatin Mongia, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE