Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 25

Statute: Stamp Act, 1899 (stamp-act-1899)

Kaushal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 240Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

by which the petitioner has been dismissed from the service and further to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the final Patna High Court CWJC No.2681 of 2019 dt.12-02-2024 2/3 order of punishment has been passed by the order ...

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

undefined INSC 256Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6909 of 2022 ====================================================== Chandradeo Mandal, Son of Dukhi Mandal, resident of Village- Khagor, P.S.- Kiul, District- Lakhisarai. ... ......

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

undefined INSC 119Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

of fact with regard the date of the marriage, the same ought not to be considered while exercising the writ jurisdiction. The petitioner has always been at liberty to approach before the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction to settle the disputed question of fact. 8. This Court has heard the lea...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 264Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr.Avinash Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s: Mr. Abbas Haider, SC-6 Mr. Wasi Mohammad, AC to SC-6 For the Corporation : Mr. Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225

1973 4 SCC 225Supreme Court of India

68% Match

FACTS: Challenged Kerala Land Reforms Act. 13-judge bench reviewed parliament's power to amend the Constitution. Held: Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, but cannot alter or destroy the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution. Ratio: Basic Structure doctri...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Rajesh Tewari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 108Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1022 of 2021 ====================================================== Rajesh Tewari Son of Srinath Tiwari Resident of 3, Dilkhush Street, Opposite Circus Avenue S.O. Circus Avenue, Kolkata, West Bengal-700017. ... ... Petitione...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 564Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.729 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.Sheo Charan Dalmia @ Sheocharan Bishwanath Dalmia Son of Late Vishwanath Dalmia @ Bishwanath Laxminaryan Dalmia, Resident of Mohalla Dalmia House Dhami Tola, ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Rajesh Tewari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 618Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

Brajesh Kumar @ Brajesh Kumar Pandey, Son of Shailendra Kumar Pandey, Resident of Mohalla-Bagmali, P.S.-Town Hajipur, District-Vaishali-844101. ... ... Petitioner. Versus 1.The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Excise Department, Bihar, Patna. 2.The Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna. 3.The Dist...

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

undefined INSC 446Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% 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 →
Harendra Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 474Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

petitioner. Therefore, the same has to held as bad, illegal, contrary to the provisions of Rule 27(ii) of the Control Order and has to necessarily set aside. 9. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances and the law laid down by this Hon’ble...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 4Next Page →