Filter results by 1
Document types
Courts
- Bombay High Court56312
- Kerala High Court55404
- Patna High Court43187
- Telangana High Court28102
- Punjab and Haryana High Court18443
- Rajasthan High Court15859
- Gujarat High Court10284
- Chhattisgarh High Court9470
Judges in the latest 300
- Debtsrecovery Tribunal8
- Goda Raghuram6
- Ghulam Mohammed6
- R.P. Sondurbaldota4
- D.S.R.Varma3
- V.Eswaraiah3
- F.I. Rebello3
- R.P.Sondurbaldota2
Years
Decided between
All courts — latest judgments
171–180 of 258,046 judgments, newest first (0.32 seconds)
-
C482/866/2008 of NEERAJ KUMARA BANSAL Vs SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE 2 ND AND ANOTER
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
Mr. Mohd. Azam, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the respondent- State. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition. He further prayed that if the trial court does not accept the request of the petitioner, the …
-
HABC/20/2008 of ABDUL RAHMAN Vs STATE and OTHERS
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Habeas Corpus Petition No. 20 of 2008 Abdul Rahman ..…… Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …….. Respondents ………. Mr. N.S.Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Pujari, Additional Government
-
WPMS/483/2005 of RAKESH KUMAR Vs CIVIL JUDGE SD and ORS.
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 483 of 2005 (M/S) Rakesh Kumar ........... Petitioner Versus Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)/IIIrd F.T.C. Dehradun and another ............ Respondent ............. Hon’ble V.K. GUPTA, C. J. Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the …
-
C482/869/2008 of ARUN CHAUHAN AND ANR Vs STATE AND ANR
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
Mr. G.C. Lakhchaura, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the respondent - State. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the petition. Permission granted. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) …
-
WPMS/345/2007 of VED PRAKASH VERMA Vs RAJA ARVIND PITTI AND ORS
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 345 of 2007 (M/S) Ved Prakash Verma ..…… Petitioner Versus Raja Arvind Pitti and others …….. Respondents ………. Mr. Rattan Lal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for
-
WPSS/782/2005 of BISHAN DUTT MISHRA Vs UNION OF INDIA and ORS.
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 782 of 2005 (S/S) Bishan Dutt Mishra ….Petitioner. Versus Union of India and others ....Respondents. Mr. B.D. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 31st December …
-
BA1/1115/2008 of GULABO DEVI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated : Nainital the 31th December, 2008 Criminal Bail Application No.1115 of 2008 Order on the bail application of accused CRIMINAL SIDE Gulabo Devi, W/o Shri Manohar Lal. … Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand … Opposite
-
C482/609/2008 of RADHEY SHYAM Vs STATE AND ANOTHER
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
796/08 In C-482 No. 609/08 Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the respondent-State. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition. Permission granted. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Stay …
-
WPMS/509/2005 of SURVEYOR GENERAL OF INDIA Vs CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL and ORS
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Delay Condonation Application No. 8847 of 2008 In Writ Petition No. 509 of 2005 (M/S) Surveryor General of India. ……… Petitioner Versus Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal & others. …… Respondents Mr. Pradeep Joshi, Standing
-
WPMS/2385/2007 of BHUWAN CHANDRA and ANR. Vs STATE and OTHERS
Uttarakhand High Court 31 December 2008
of 2007 Hon’ble B. S. Verma, J. List has been revised. None responds for the petitioners though called twice. Sri Sudhir Kumar, brief holder is present for respondent – state. The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. (B. S. Verma,J.) Dt. 31.12.2008