n(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), at the hearing of any such application, the Court may grant such interim relief as it may consider necessary, pending determination by it of the preliminary issue as to be jurisdiction. 2014 of the Gauhati High Court whereby the revision petition filed by the respondents was allowed and the eviction suit filed by the appellant was dismissed. 2 were declared elected to the general and reserved seat respectively.
This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 04. However, on going through the records, we find that no such ground has also been taken even in the memorandum of appeal filed in the present appeal. The appellant and respondent No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SUBBA RAO J. Therefore, without taking a plea of unjust enrichment either in the writ petition or before this Court, we are not inclined to allow him to argue the plea visit this web page link (please click the following webpage) at the time of argument and entertain such a plea, particularly, in view of the fact that the respondents did not have any notice of such a plea taken for the first time at argument stage.
nSuch an issue was also not argued before the learned Single Judge as site web (just click the following web page) no such reference is there in the order of the learned Single Judge. 2, 4 and 6 were nominated for the reserved seat. ” A division Bench of the Nagpur High Court in Baliram Tikaram Marathe v. It is, however, stated by the learned Additional Solicitor General that such an issue was raised before the Division Bench. The statement before the police only be called circumstantial evidence of, complicity and not direct evidence in the strict sense.
This case arose out of an election held in December, 1951, for the double member Lakhnadon Legislative Assembly Constituency in Madhya Pradesh, one of the seats being reserved for Scheduled Tribes. It is only after there is “manufacture” that the input that is mentioned in Rule 57F(1) ceases to be an input covered by the proviso to sub-rule (ii) thereof. Lakshmikumaran, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, argued before us that CEGAT has lost sight of the most fundamental aspect of the reply to the show cause notice, namely, that ED coating did not lead to “manufacture”.
He cited various judgments in support of his submissions which will be adverted to a little later in this judgment. ” As it seems to us it is to protect accused persons from being prejudiced by statements made to police officers who by reason of the fact that an investigation is known to be on foot at the time the statement is made, look these up [please click the following webpage] may be in a position to influence the maker of it and, on the other hand, to protect accused persons from the prejudice at the hands of persons who in the knowledge that an investigation has already started, are prepared to tell untruths.
, continued to be the same inputs for the purpose of the proviso despite the fact that there may be value addition on account of ED coating. The appellant and respondents 1, 3,5 and 7 therein were duly nominated candidates for the general seat in the said constituency, while respondents Nos. If an arbitration agreement does exist between the parties, which is not admitted, the law and rule governing the procedure of any arbitration between the parties is the Singapore International Arbitration Act (the Act) and the UNICITRAL Rules respectively.
In the judgments relied upon by Shri Vaidyanathan, which, have a peek at this website (please click the following webpage) by and large, reiterate the proposition laid down in Baburam Prakash Chandra Maheshwari v. Emperor (2) expressed a similar idea in regard to the object underlying the section,at p. It is his short submission that the “inputs” being bumpers, grills, etc. Antarim Zila Parishad, it has been held that an alternative remedy is not a bar to the entertaining of writ petition filed for the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights or where there has been a violation of the principles of natural justice or where the order under challenge is wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of the statute is under challenge.
But a mention is made in the judgment that such a plea was argued. We need hardly point out that in the illustration given by us, the evidence of the witness in Court is direct evidence as opposed to testimony to a fact suggesting guilt. No objection was taken before the Returning Officer in respect _of the nomination of either the appellant or respondent No. But we could not find the same raised in the pleadings nor was it considered.
The witness can then be contradicted with his previous statement. -This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, setting aside that of the Election Tribunal, Kanpur, dismissing the petition filed by the respondent for setting aside the election of, the appellant as a member of the Parliament from the Kanpur constituency. n(7) The conduct of an investigation under this Act against a Public servant in respect of any action shall not affect such action, or any power or duty this site (please click the following webpage) of any other public servant to take further action with respect to any matter subject to the investigation.
100(1)(d)(iv) respectively of the amended Act.