Search for: "State v. Rao"
Results 141 - 160
of 227
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jul 2015, 5:20 am
Mishkin The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing yesterday entitled “The Administrative State v. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 9:04 am
DLN Rao Senior Advocate, and advocates Mr. [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 3:10 am
” The motion cites the 2001 California Supreme Court Comedy III Productions, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Aug 2014, 1:08 am
(The age of consent was raised to 14 and more in many U.S. states in the 20th century. [read post]
5 Nov 2013, 8:09 am
RAO also supported the lower court’s decision. [read post]
1 Nov 2013, 1:37 pm
Windsor" I'm sure that I'm continuing to miss new pieces on United States v. [read post]
30 Sep 2013, 1:44 pm
There's clearly been a flurry of writing over the summer concerning United States v. [read post]
26 Sep 2013, 6:43 pm
Here are two propositions that United States v. [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 2:25 pm
(Neomi Rao) Commentators on Windsor v. [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 7:06 am
Here’s a summary of the paper: In United States v. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 9:23 am
Pranesh further criticized the decision of Justice Manmohan Singh of the Delhi High Court in John Wiley v. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 10:40 pm
Speaking of India’s contentious compulsory licensing order in Natco v. [read post]
10 Aug 2013, 2:22 pm
In the case of 20th Century Fox Film Corporation v. [read post]
4 Aug 2013, 4:54 pm
Saka Venkata Rao (AIR 1953 SC 210) in which it has been held that Article 191 lays down the same set of disqualifications for election as well as for continuing as a member.Now let’s move on to CEC v Jan Chaukidar. [read post]
19 Jul 2013, 11:07 pm
UOI in which, contrary to the decade-long tradition of the CJI not dissenting, he was in a minority.Other Judgments (except Lily Thomas) delivered by him or as part of the Bench are: State of Maharashtra v. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 3:57 am
In an order dated March 27, 2013, the Bench comprising Justice Dharma Rao and Justice Aruna Jagadeesan stated that Sections 2(k), 85 and 87 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 fell foul of the law relating to tribunal appointments laid down by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. [read post]
3 Jun 2013, 4:55 am
In the case of Chintaman Rao v. [read post]
22 Feb 2013, 1:00 pm
If our commercial speech doctrine doesn’t soon start recognizing this, the regulatory state will be in trouble. [read post]
22 Feb 2013, 11:45 am
Example: LV v. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 10:42 am
Rao had resigned from the partnership firm and that he was no longer interested in having books which he authored or co-authored published under the agreement. [read post]
