top lawyers in Supreme Court India – http://supremecourtindia.in/i-was-sexually-harassed-in-the-corridors-of-the-supreme-court/. A question would often arise whether these expenses are the hypothetical landlord’s burden or that of the hypothetical tenant. We therefore proceed on the footing that this method was properly adopted by the assessing authority. 85(3) which mandate setting off as at the date of the declaration of a dividend are also inconsistent with CVI’s argument. top lawyers in Supreme Court of India my view, section 74(1) refers to the “debts and liabilities” of the company, and therefore it can be invoked to ensure that non-provable liabilities are paid by the contributories.
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission must make up its own mind, if it is asked to do so, as to whether it would be in the public interest for those cases to be referred to the High Court of Justiciary. I cannot accept that argument. In an appeal against his award by the respondents under s. Counsel also urged that under s. (4) of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act were not complies with and the contract was on that account invalid. The question of the compensation payable for the remaining land was referred to arbitration under s.
The expression “dismiss” does not top advocates in Supreme Court of India its etymological sense necessarily involve any such meaning as is urged by counsel (1) [1963] INSC 100; [1964] 3 S. Further, the liability of contributories under section 74(1) and 150(1) is to the court, and, as explained in para 132 above, the liquidator is acting effectively on behalf of the Court when seeking payments under that section: it is an additional function to his more familiar role, which is concerned with provable debts and liabilities.
though the principles on which the profits basis method is worked out are fairly well-understood, there is nevertheless bound to be controversy in regard to actual working expenses shown in the assessee’s accounts. 90 enable a creditor with security who proves for the unsecured balance of his debt to vary the amount for which he proves top law firms in Supreme Court of India the event of the creditor realising the security, or in the event of a change in the value of the security, on a date subsequent to that on which he proved for his debt.
It will be for the Appeal Court to decide what course it ought to take if a reference were to be made to it on those grounds by the commission”. 14 of the Act power to ap- point includes power to dismiss, but not to determine employment. The LBHI2 administrators nonetheless argue that, because section 74 only applies after a winding-up and the liquidator has no liability to pay non-provable liabilities, such claims cannot be liabilities under section 74(1). 531 it can suitably be applied law firms in Supreme Court India the present case-or not, as Counsel for the Club stated before us that he was not pressing that objection.
The Government acquired about 500 acres of land from the respondents under the Defence of India Act, 1939, and a settlement was reached in respect of the compensation to be paid for all except about 48 acres of the land. 19(1)(e) which entitled the respondents to compensation at the market value of the land. The High Court decided both the grounds in favour of the respondents. And the set-off provisions of rule 2. There are other provisions of the 1986 Rules which are inconsistent with CVI’s contention that the scheme of the 1986 legislation is to have a single date by reference to which all debts and claims are valued, and which demonstrate that, where the legislature wishes to revalue a claim by reference to the date of payment, it so provides.
It deals with all appointments, and there is no reason to hold, having regard to the context in which the expression occurs, that the authority invested with the power of appointment has the power to determine employment as a penalty, but not otherwise. But that does not end the controversy, for, even. In support of that contention he urged that in relation to the tenure of service of a public servant, the expression “to dismiss” has come to mean to determine employment as a measure of punishment.
19(1)(b) of the Act to be determined in accordance with s. The arbitrator considered various sale deeds produced before him but rejected these and fixed the compensation by capitalising the annual profits from the lands. Validity of the contract was challenged by the respondents on, two grounds-(1) that the appellants were not at the relevant time members of the Association; and (2) that the requirements of s. “ advocates in Supreme Court India the light of these authorities I would hold that convictions that have become final because they were not appealed timeously, and appeals that have been finally disposed of by the High Court of Justiciary, must be treated as incapable of being brought under review on the ground that there was a miscarriage of justice because the accused did not have access to a solicitor while he was detained prior to the police interview.
14 of the General Clauses Act is a general provision: it does not merely deal with the appointment of public servants. If they are of the former class, they cannot obviously be claimed as deductible expenses for the hypothetical tenant would not take them into account while offering the rent at which he would take the premises on lease.