كسارة الحجر المتنقلة هي حل معياري أكثر شمولاً ومنهجية ومرونة تقدمه الشركة للعملاء. وهي مجهزة بمعدات مضيفة مخصصة عالية الأداء، مع حجم صغير وقوة معالجة قوية؛ يعتمد الإطار على تصميم شعاع مستقيم بسيط ومجهز بدعائم ثابتة قابلة للتعديل. يتمتع الإطار بثبات جيد ويمكن تركيبه ونقله بسرعة عدد كبير من السيور الناقلة المركبة لديها اتصال ونقل أكثر معقولية وموثوقية، ويمكن تركيبها واستخدامها بسرعة، ويتم اعتماد نظام التحكم الكهربائي المتكامل لضمان التشغيل الفعال والمستقر لخط الإنتاج.
تلتزم الشركة دائمًا بمعدات سحق التعدين ومعدات صنع الرمل ومعدات الطحن الصناعية، وتوفير حلول عالية الجودة للرمل والحصى ومجموعات كاملة من المعدات للمشاريع الهندسية واسعة النطاق مثل الطرق السريعة والسكك الحديدية والمياه والكهرباء، إلخ. ، وتسعى جاهدة لممارسة التصنيع الدقيق المحلي والتخطيط العلمي العالمي، مع اعتبار آسيا المنطقة النائية والعملاء المشعين حول العالم. بعد أكثر من 30 عامًا من التطوير، نجحت العديد من منتجات الشركة في اجتياز العديد من شهادات الجودة الدولية مثل الشهادة الدولية ISO9001:2015، وشهادة الاتحاد الأوروبي CE، وشهادة GOST الروسية. بعد ذلك، في السعي لتحقيق التميز، سنستمر في استخدام منتجات عالية الجودة والتكنولوجيا الاحترافية والخدمات المخلصة لمساعدة العملاء على خلق قيمة أكبر، واستخدام الإجراءات العملية لمواصلة تعزيز البناء البيئي للحضارة الإنسانية.
·Get free access to the complete judgment in CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA v GURUKRIPA STONE CRUSHER on CaseMine GURUKRIPA STONE CRUSHER Karnataka High Court Jun 12 2023; Subsequent References; CaseIQ AI Recommendations CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA v GURUKRIPA STONE
M/S Rama Stone Crusher on CaseMine Get free access to the complete judgment in State Of Haryana v M/S Rama Stone Crusher on CaseMine The learned counsel for the claimant referred to the following observations of this Court in the aforementioned judgment It is correct that respondent s expert Preet Mohan Singh RW 1 had no personal
WPs 3685TO3692 4930&4931/17 1 Common Judgment IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO 3685/2017 Jai Gajanan Stone Crusher through its Proprietor/Partner Namdeo Ananda Bhonde Aged about 46 years Resident of Pimprideshmukh Tq
Judgement Date July 10 2008 Court High Court of Madhya Pradesh India Judgment Ajit Singh J Order 1 The order passed in Writ Petition No 5768/2008 M/s Anu Stone Crusher v stated the facts having rise to these petitions are that the petitioners are proprietorship firms and they own a stone crusher each The petitioners for
·Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S SAMRAT STONE CRUSHER v THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on CaseMine THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR DIVISION BENCH WP No 24767 of 2021
Learned counsel Shri Sourabh Hedge for the complainant and the learned AAG Smt representing the learned HCGP for the accused are present before the Court physically 2 Learned counsel for the appellants submits that this contempt proceeding is filed by the complainant against the order dated 7 th September 2022 passed by the
·Order of the National Green Tribunal regarding grant of EC to a stone crusher plant village Baluwala district Dehradun Uttarakhand 03/01/2023 1989 where stone crushing is not permissible in the light of judgment of the Supreme Court Rural Litigation & Entitlement Kendra v State of & Ors AIR 1988 SC 2187
·2 Judgement in Anurag Kumar supra the Court further observed "Now coming to the merit of the order the part of the order under appeal whereby the direction has been issued to allow the petitioner respondent to continue till attaining the age of 60 years 31st January 2006 after staying the operation of the order dated 12th December 2005 amounts to
·ms goldmine stone crusher v STATE OF HP Mr Ramakant Sharma learned Senior Counsel on instructions states that petitioners case can be disposed of in terms of decision dated rendered by this Court in CWP No 7850 of 2010 titled Shiv Kumar versus State of Himachal Pradesh and other connected matters
4 6 Therefore all these writ petitions are allowed directing the Land Acquisition Officer / Revenue Divisional Officer to refer the matters separately as individual reference under Section 64 of the Land Acquisition Act 2013 to the LARR authority within a period of three 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order
·Petition s for Special Leave to Appeal C No 19445/2004 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01/07/2004 in WP No 1124/2001 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital] With appln s for c/delay in filing counter affidavit and exemption from filing and emplacement as party respondent and modification of Court s
·It is alleged that unauthorisedly building stone material are stocked in the crusher unit of the writ petitioner 3 The writ petitioner submitted a representation raising the jurisdiction of the Deputy Director Department of Mines and Geology Bagalkot to issue the notice and also submitted that he has not stocked the building stone
The stone crusher has provided GI sheet covering to vibrating screen conveyor belts wind breaking wall of 20 feet around the periphery of stone crusher to control dust emissions provided water sprinkler arrangement at primary crusher conveyor transfer point finished goods storage area and carried out tree plantation
· 2 After hearing learned Senior Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective appellants and the grievances made it appears that the main grievances are two fold 1 The order passed by the Tribunal directing to pay 00 000/ by each stone crusher by way of interim compensation; and 2 That operation of the stone crushers taking into
·The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Mahesh Chandra Sharma J — Since all these writ petitions relate to refusal to operate the Stone Crushers in villages Indroli Angrawali and Fatehpur in Tehsil Kaman District Bharatpur under the provisions of Section 21A of the Air Prevention and Control of Pollution Act 1981 by the Rajasthan State Pollution Control
crushing of the stone High Court of Uttarakhand has taken a contrary view in its judgment dated in Kumaon Stone Crusher Supra as noted above 62 Learned counsel for the writ petitioners have relied on few judgments of this Court which need to be noticed Reliance is placed on Two Judge Bench in
WPs 3685TO3692 4930&4931/17 1 Common Judgment IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO 3685/2017 Jai Gajanan Stone Crusher through its Proprietor/Partner Namdeo Ananda Bhonde Aged about 46 years Resident of Pimprideshmukh Tq
·Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S GUNDOJI STONE CRUSHER v THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on CaseMine Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S GUNDOJI STONE CRUSHER v THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on CaseMine IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY
·JUDGMENT Mr Adarsh Bhagat GA for R 1 1 The petitioners claim to be involved in the business of stone crushing under the valid permission granted by the authorities concerned and are aggrieved of the Government order bearing No 1018 JK GAD of 2020 dated whereby the respondent No 1 has accorded sanction to the constitution of a
crushing of the stone High Court of Uttarakhand has taken a contrary view in its judgment dated in Kumaon Stone Crusher Supra as noted above 62 Learned counsel for the writ petitioners have relied on few judgments of this Court which need to be noticed Reliance is placed on Two Judge Bench in
·IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition M/S No 1767 of 2017 M/S Sidhbali Stone Crusher & othersPetitioners State of Uttarakhand & With Writ Petition M/S No 433 of 2017 Ajeet Stone IndustriesPetitioner Union of India & OthersRespondents Ms Sheetal Advocate holding brief of Mr
خدمة الانترنت على مدار 24 ساعة 
+8615836135778（WhatsApp）
رقم 1688، طريق جاوك الشرقي، منطقة بودونغ الجديدة، شنغهاي، الصين. حقوق النشر © 2024 الشركة المصنعة لكسارة الصين
