Bare Act Search Results

Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 [Repealed] Repealing Act 1

Title: Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958

State: Central

Year: 1904

..... 7. Owners under disability or not in possession (1) Ifthe owner of a protected monument is unable, by reason of infancy or otherdisability, to act for himself, the person legally competent to act on hisbehalf may exercise the powers conferred upon an owner by section 6. (2) In the case ofvillage property, the headman other village-officer exercising powers of management over such property mayexercise the powers conferred upon an owner by section 6. (3) Nothing in thissection shall be deemed to empower any person not being of the same religion asthe person on whose behalf he is acting to make or execute an agreement relatingto a protected monument which or any part of which is periodically used for thereligious worship or observances of that religion. 8. Application of endowment to repair a protected monument (1)If any owner or other person competent to enter into an agreement under section6 for the maintenance of a protected monument refuses or fails to enter intosuch an agreement, and if any endowment has been created for the purpose ofkeeping such monument in repair or for that purpose among other, the CentralGovernment may institute a suit in the court of the.....

Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 [Repealed] Section 9

Title: Application of Endowment to Repair of an Ancient Monument

State: Central

Year: 1904

(1) If any owner or other person competent to enter into an agreement under section 5 for the preservation of a protected monument, refuses or fails to enter into such an agreement when proposed to him by the Collector, and if any endowment has been created for the purpose of keeping such monument in repair, or for that purpose among others, the Collector may institute a suit in the Court of the District Judge, or, if the estimated cost of repairing the monument does not exceed one thousand rupees, may make an application to the District Judge for the proper application of such endowment or part thereof. (2) On the hearing of an application under sub-section (1), the District Judge may summon and examine the owner and any person whose evidence appears to him necessary, and may pass an order for the proper application of the endowment or of any part thereof, and any such order may be executed as if it were the decree of a Civil Court.

Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904, (Maharashtra) Section 3

Title: Definitions

State: Maharashtra

Year: 1904

..... NOTES Good faith.-See section 2(7) of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, section 52 of the Indian Penal Code and section 178 of the Indian Contract Act. An ex parte decree was passed on February 12, 1935 by Ahmednagar Court and it was transferred to Poona Court on February 25, 1935. The decree was set aside on January 15, 1936. Again an ex parte decree was passed in 1936. No darkhast for execution of the subsequent decree was filed till June, 16, 1947, but four darkhasts were filed successively in Poona Court to execute the earlier decree of 1935 and were disposed off in 1936, 1939, 1942 and 1946 respectively. A fifth darkhast was filed in 1946 to execute the earlier decree and an application made in 1947 to amend the darkhast so as to execute the subsequent decree. It was held, that the decree holder was not entitled to claim relief under section 14(2) of the Indian Limitation Act as the previous darkhasts were not prosecuted in good faith.-Sadashiv Shivramv. Govind Sadashiv, I. L. R. 1954 Bom. 1173 : AIR 1955 Bom. 93 : 55 Bom. L. R. 785; Balkrishnayya v. LingaRao, 1943 Mad. 804 (Dist.). Bona fides.-Meaning.-'Bonafides' is mental state negativing fraud or dishonesty. It.....

Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904, (Maharashtra) Section 7

Title: Effect of Repeal

State: Maharashtra

Year: 1904

.....Pandurang, I. L. R. 1960 Bom. 172 : 1959 Bom. L. R. 1112; Sakharam Narayan v. Manikchand, 1955 (57) Bom.. L. R. 223 followed. Repeal of rules when new rules framed.-Framing of new octroi rules would repeal earlier one by necessary implication even though some other rules were repealed specifically.-Swastik Rubber Products Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation for the City of Poona, 1981 (4) SCC 219 : AIR 1981 SC 2022. When a temporary Act lapses, the rules and orders made thereunder expire.-State of Bombay v. Heman Shantilal, AIR 1952 Bom. 16. Section 7(1) of the Act would be applicable to the repeal of Poona City Municipal Corporation, rule 5(8) of the Exemption Rules and the consequences stated therein must follow, unless there is something in the repealed rule itself which ends the exemption.-Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation for the City of Poona, 1969 Man. L. J. 832. Repealed Notification.-It was held that the Notification even if it continued in force because of the application of section 25 of the Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904, extended the Ordinance and not the Act. In the result, the connection made by the State that the Act had been.....

Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904, (Maharashtra) Section 14

Title: Powers Conferred on Any Government to Be Exercisable from Time to Time

State: Maharashtra

Year: 1904

Where, by any Bombay Act 1[or Maharashtra Act] made after the commencement of this Act any power is conferred on 2[any Government], then that power may be exercised from time to time as occasion requires. NOTES May be exercised from time to time.-It is not correct to suggest that in the absence of the words 'from time to time' in section 6(1) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, the power of the State Government is exhausted under section 6(2) as soon as it issues a notification lowering the rate of the maximum rent payable by the tenants under section 6(1). It has power more than once.- Chimanlal v. State, AIR 1954 Bom. 397. The section confers any power on the State Government and unless a different intention appears, the power has to be exercised from time to time. Indeed, the section speaks of the power conferred on Government but this principle is of general application and the Court does not see why the principle should not apply to a person who is authorised to act under the Statute.- Dhondba v. Civil Judge, 1966 Mah. L. J. 869. ___________________________ 1. These words were inserted by the Maharashtra Adaptation of Laws (State and Concurrent.....

Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 Complete Act

State: Central

Year: 1904

.....Pradesh: M. P. Act 12 of 1964; Maharashtra: Maha. Act 12 of 1961; Manipur: Manipur Act 15 of 1977; Punjab: Punj. Act 20 of 1964; Rajasthan: Raj. Act 19 of 1961. The Act has also ceased to have effect in relation to ancient and historical monuments and archaeological sites and remains which are declared by or under the Central Act 24 of 1958 to be of national importance: See Act 24 of 1958, S. 39 (2). See also the following State Acts on the same subject. Assam Act 25 of 1959; J. and K. Act 5 of 1977 (1920 A.D.); Kerala Act 26 of 1969; Uttar Pradesh Act 7 of 1957; West Bengal Act 31 of 1957 SECTION 01: SHORT TITLE AND EXTENT - (1) This Act may be called The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904. 2[(2) It extends to the whole of India3[except the State of Jammu and Kashmir].] SECTION 02: DEFINITIONS - In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context,- (1) "ancient monument" means any structure, erection or monument or any tumulus or place of interment, or any cave, rock-sculpture, inscription or monolith, which is of historical, archaeological or artistic interest, or any remains thereof, and includes- (a) the site of an ancient monument;.....