Practice Areas
Indirect Tax Cases
Direct Tax Cases
Intellectual Property
All Practice Areas
All Courts
Filter by Jurisdiction
All Courts
SC & All High Courts
All Tribunals
+ Karnataka High Court3
+ Supreme Court Of India2
+ Punjab & Haryana High Court1
+ AAR-GST0
+ Airports Economic Regulatory Authority Appellate Tribunal0
+ Airports Economic Regulatory Authority Of India0
+ Allahabad High Court0
+ Andhra Pradesh High Court0
+ Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, GST0
+ Appellate Tribunal For Electricity0
+ Appellate Tribunal For Foreign Exchange0
+ Appellate Tribunal For Forfeited Property0
+ Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property0
+ Appellate Tribunal- Prevention Of Money Laundering Act0
+ Armed Forces Tribunal0
+ Authority For Advance Rulings0
+ Authority for Advance Rulings, GST0
+ Board For Industrial Financial Reconstruction0
+ Board of Revenue0
+ Board of Revenue, Rajasthan0
+ Bombay High Court0
+ CESTAT0
+ Calcutta High Court0
+ Central Administrative Tribunal0
+ Central Board of Excise & Customs0
+ Central Electricity Regulatory Commission0
+ Central Information Commission0
+ Chhattisgarh High Court0
+ Collector Appeals0
+ Commissioner (Appeals)0
+ Company Law Board0
+ Competition Appellate Tribunal0
+ Competition Commission Of India0
+ Consumer Disputes Redressal0
+ Copyright Board0
+ Cyber Appellate Tribunal0
+ Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal0
+ Debts Recovery Tribunal0
+ Delhi High Court0
+ Deputy Collector0
+ District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission0
+ District Court0
+ First Appellate Authority0
+ Gauhati High Court0
+ Gujarat High Court0
+ Himachal Pradesh High Court0
+ Income Tax Appellate Tribunal0
+ Insolvency And Bankruptcy Board Of India0
+ Intellectual Property Appellate Board0
+ Jammu and Kashmir High Court0
+ Jharkhand High Court0
+ Kerala High Court0
+ Madhya Pradesh High Court0
+ Madras High Court0
+ Manipur High Court0
+ Meghalaya High Court0
+ Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission0
+ National Anti-Profiteering Authority0
+ National Company Law Appellate Tribunal0
+ National Company Law Tribunal0
+ National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission0
+ National Green Tribunal0
+ Orissa High Court0
+ Patna High Court0
+ Petroleum And Natural Gas Regulatory Board0
+ Privy Council0
+ RERA0
+ Railway Claims Tribunal0
+ Rajasthan High Court0
+ Right to Information0
+ SEBI0
+ Securities Appellate Tribunal0
+ Settlement Commission0
+ Sikkim High Court0
+ State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission0
+ Telangana High Court0
+ Telecom Disputes Settlement And Appellate Tribunal0
+ Trade Marks Registry0
+ Tripura High Court0
+ Uttarakhand High Court0
Apply Filter
Court Filter
+ RBI
+ SEBI
+ Andhra Pradesh
+ Arunachal Pradesh
+ Assam
+ Bihar
+ Chandigarh
+ Chhattisgarh
+ Delhi
+ Goa
+ Gujarat
+ Haryana
+ Himachal Pradesh
+ Jharkhand
+ Karnataka
+ Kerala
+ Madhya Pradesh
+ Maharashtra
+ Manipur
+ Meghalaya
+ Mizoram
+ Nagaland
+ Odisha
+ Punjab
+ Rajasthan
+ Sikkim
+ Tamil Nadu
+ Telangana
+ Tripura
+ Uttarakhand
+ Uttar Pradesh
+ West Bengal
+ Supreme Court Of India
+ Allahabad High Court
+ Andhra Pradesh High Court
+ Bombay High Court
+ Calcutta High Court
+ Chhattisgarh High Court
+ Delhi High Court
+ Gauhati High Court
+ Himachal Pradesh High Court
+ Jammu and Kashmir High Court
+ Jharkhand High Court
+ Karnataka High Court
+ Kerala High Court
+ Madhya Pradesh High Court
+ Madras High Court
+ Manipur High Court
+ Meghalaya High Court
+ Orissa High Court
+ Patna High Court
+ Punjab & Haryana High Court
+ Rajasthan High Court
+ Sikkim High Court
+ Telangana High Court
+ Tripura High Court
+ Uttarakhand High Court
Apply Filter
Apply Filter
Judge Filter
Filter by Judge (Beta)
Judge Name
Bench
Other Filters
To
2021 Onwards3
From 2011 To 20200
From 2001 To 20100
From 1991 To 20000
From 1981 To 19902
From 1971 To 19800
From 1961 To 19700
From 1951 To 19601
Before 19500

Cases cited for the legal proposition you have searched for.

...Co. Ltd. (1944) 2 All ER 293 Also see the observations of Lord Goddard in Moore v. Hewitt (1947) 2 All ER 270 and Penny v...frame as many as 79 charges against the appellant and decided not to proceed against the other named co-conspirators. This is the order impugned before us. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order the...Raja Soap Factory v. S.P Shantharaj. ...

... Aeroplane Co. Ltd. [1944] 2 AER 293 at 300; Moore v. Hewitt 1947 2 AER 270 at 272A; Penny v. Mcholas, 1950 2 AER 92A and Javed Ahmed Abdul Hamid Pawala v. State of Maharashtra, [19...they cause prejudice and do injury. Criminal Trial-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-sec. 223- Whether an accused can demand as of a right trial with co-accused. lnterpretation of..., [1973] 1 SCR 697 and Raja Soap Factory v. S. P. Shantara;, 1965 2 SCR 800 referred to. Halsbury's Laws of England, 4th Vol.10 page at para 720 and Ammon Rubinstein's Jurisdiction and Illegality, [1965...

...., pages 16-50). Reference may also be made to Raja Soap Factory v. S.P. Shantharaj... & Development Co. it has been stated. Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and determine, and in order that it may exist the following are essential: (1) A court created by law..., para 578 and page 300, the relevant notes 8, 11 and 15; Dias on Jurisprudence, 5th Edn., pages 128 and 130; Young v. Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd...

... made to Raja Soap Factory v. S.P. Shantharaj...pages 174 and 175 of the volume. At page 174, referring to the decision in Carlile v. National Oil & Development Co. it has been stated...notes 8, 11 and 15; Dias on Jurisprudence, 5th Edn., pages 128 and 130; Young v. Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd. [(1944...

...onwards and also Amnon Rubinstein —- Jurisdiction and Illegality (1965 Edn., pages 16-50). Reference may also be made to Raja Soap Factory v...& Development Co. it has been stated. Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and determine, and in order that it may exist the following are essential: (1) A court created by law...relevant notes 8, 11 and 15; Dias on Jurisprudence, 5th Edn., pages 128 and 130; Young v. Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd. [(1944...

.... In Reid Hewitt and Co., v. Joseph, 1918 AC 717 (A), the House of Lords has. held that - "the expression the costs shall follow the event in the second proviso to...was held that fully paid-up shareholders are contributories without any qualifications. 19. In 7 - Imperial Oil Soap and General Mills Co. Ltd., Delhi v. Ram...any inconsistency with the earlier enactment. The two provisions can co-exist side by side even though the one may, to some extent, overlap the other. (Para 3) (B...