Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 55

Statute: Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (indian-divorce-act-1869)

08.10.2013 as well as for payment of 5% of total amount, which was to be paid at the juncture of approval of clay model submitted by the petitioner, as per clause 5(ii) of the Agreement. The said writ application was dismissed and the petitioner then filed LPA No. 494 of 2014, which was disposed of...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

come under the purview of superstructure, as mentioned in Section 2(k) of the Act, 2008. 12. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. (supra), after referring Sections 8, 9 and 22 of the Act 2008 has held in paragraph-5 of the said...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Shahbaj Kuraishi Md. Sharif Quraishi v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 281Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5311 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2017 Thana- MEHSI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.Shahbaj Kuraishi Md. Sharif Quraishi @ Sudhan Quraishi Village – Chaklahi P.S.- Mehs...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Gajendra Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 837Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

1408, 14th Floor, D.B. Ozone Beside Thakur Mall, Near Dahisar Check Naka, Mira Road, P.S. - Kashimira, East Thane Mumbai (401107) 4.Gyan Ranjan Thakur @ Anshu Thakur Son Of Gajendra Thakur Resident Of Village - Rupolia, Panchkadi, P.S. - Dhaka, District - Motihari, At Present Flat No .- 1408, 14th ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Mukesh Kumar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 322Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

the petitioner to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month to the opposite party and Rs. 1,000/- each per month for their three children, total being Rs. 6,000/-. 8. This Court is of the considered view that if, the petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 6,000/- he is required to pay towards maintenance allowance ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Upendra Kumar v. Ashok Rai

undefined INSC 658Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.57 of 2024 ====================================================== Upendra Kumar @ Upendra Roy Son of Ashok Rai, Resident of Mauza, Mirpur, Bhuwal, P.O.- Dighwara, Police Station- Dighwara, District- Sar...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Upendra Kumar v. Ashok Rai

undefined INSC 460Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

construction over the suit property and parties were directed to maintain status quo without hearing the defendant/petitioner. No notice was issued as is reflected from the copy of the order sheet Patna High Court C.Misc. No.57 of 2024 dt.02-02-2024 2/4 attached with the present petition. ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Jyoti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 159Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

70% Match

available. It is apt and proper to refer the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Parvati Devi @ Parvati Singh Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors., reported in 2024 (1) BLJ 178 held as follows: Patna High Court CWJC No.426 of 2022 dt.26-11-2024 6/8 “5. This Court would also refer ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVISION No.12 of 2021 ====================================================== Rang Vikalp registered office at Studio Variation Artists Studio Sardar Patel Colony, Patliputra Colony Telephone Exchange Road behind SIS Security Office, Kurj...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

parties ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s: Mr. S.D.Sanjay,Sr. Advodate Mr. Mohit Agarwal Mr. Rahul Kumar Mr.Vishal Kumar Ms. Priya Gupta For the State Mr. Nalin Vilochan Tiwary, AC to GA 9 For BSTDCL Mr. Kumar A...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 2Next Page →