91 of the British North America Act, and the Bill was therefore. The Division Bench of the High Court vide order dated 1. 2 to 9 to hold them responsible for the transactions from the year 2001 to 2006, except on charge No. Although the Industrial Tribunals in awarding privilege leave or sick leave must not fail to consider their effect on production and so on the interest of the community in general, this Court would be reluctant under Art. 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure may, at best, throw the burden of proof on the plaintiff ; but in the present case the question of burden of proof is not material, for the findings of the three Courts were arrived at on a consideration of the entire evidence.
268 of 2010 before the High Court, which was also dismissed by the Division Bench on the basis of the findings recorded by the learned single Judge and held that the charges framed against the respondent Nos. 2001 stood established and proved against them but they cannot be held guilty for the same as the appellant herself was a signatory to the above Resolution. We are also unable to appreciate the contention that different standards of proof have been applied by the Courts in respect of the different parties.
85 of a revenue for Provincial purposes so as to be within the exclusive legislative competence of the Provincial Legislature, but was merely part of a legislative plan to prevent the operation within the Province Suspension of Sentense Lawyer in Chandigarh those banking institutions which had been called into existence and given the necessary powers there to conduct their business by the only proper authority, the Parliament of the Dominion, under s. The order of the Magistrate under s.
136 of the Constitution to interfere with an award unless its provisions are unsustainable on any reasonable grounds and make a violent departure from the practice and trend prevailing Solicitor in Chandigarh comparable concerns. Thereafter, the appellant filed LPA No. 2 to 9 in the present appeal. Having regard to the said consideration, it came to the conclusion that it was a colorable legislation aimed at to prevent the operation within the province of the aforesaid banking institutions.
The two ships concerned Proclaimed Offender Lawyer in Chandigarh the collision were the cargo vessel, S. For the purpose of ascertaining the true plan underlying the bill, the Judicial committee compared the relative legislative lists, took judicial notice of other Acts and the object and purpose of the Act in question. The Plaintiff-Buyer filed Execution Petition No. 2010 passed by the learned single Judge and found that the same is justified after considering that the appellant herself was a party to the above mentioned Resolution that has appointed the deceased Vijay Mehta as the Managing Trustee of the Trust.
The Defendant- Seller sold the property in question to Sri Rajesh on 20. 2 to 9 in delegating their powers and functions to the deceased Vijay Mehta as per clauses 9 and 11(h) of the Trust Deed vide the Resolution of the Trust dated 30. Further, the High Court held that the appellant did not object to his functioning as a Managing Trustee at the time when all the powers were being delegated to him and found that the petition was not seriously contested before the learned single Judge and rejected the appeal of the appellant.
Nor is there any merit in the second point either. However, as there was no evidence against respondent Nos. 2008 in the Court of IInd Additional Civil Judge (Sr. The respondent is ex-Sub-Lieutenant Arabinda Chakravarti, who at all material times was a commissioned officer Regular Bail Law Firm in Chandigarh the then Royal Indian Navy with its headquarters at Bombay. What flows from the conjoint reading from the aforesaid provisions is that before import of any specimen of species included in appendix I, prior import permit of Scientific Authority and Management Authority is required and before such a permit is given, the opinion of Scientific Authority as well as the Management Authority on particular aspects is required.
2007, under a registered sale deed. 2 to 9 by the JCC were established. Though the learned Counsel says that material evidence has been ignored by the Courts, he has not been able to point out what evidence has been excluded. 2010 declined to interfere with the order dated 2. The Courts have considered the entire evidence placed before them and the findings were based on an appreciation of the said evidence. ultra vires the Provincial Legislature. 4, it has held that there is culpability of the deceased Vijay Mehta and further, the JCC has held that the charges against respondent Nos.
The Privy Council accepted the contention. Further, no steps were taken for the cancellation of the Resolution by her as she did not even enter into the witness box before the JCC to justify her conduct that she is not a signatory to the Resolution wherein the deceased Vijay Mehta was appointed as the Managing Trustee by other Trustees who are respondent nos. Admittedly, the Defendant-Seller was not served with a copy of the Memo and was not notified with regard to the alleged deposit.
The action which the appellant brought arose out of a collision in 982 a swept channel, a little distance outside the Madras harbour, on December 13, 1940, at about 6-51 p.