Advanced Search Results

G.S. Bajwa Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Air Force Act, 1950; Air Force Rules - Rule 102

Reported in : 59(1995)DLT742

is to conduct the prosecution, then the Judge Advocate is to assist the Court, it. the provision of Section 128 of the Air Force Act, 1950 are taken into consideration it would be quite clear that the Judge … good order and Air Force discipline, and thereby committing offences punishable under Section 41(2) and Section 65 of Air Force Act. 1950. The said General Court Martial was conducted illegally and improperly. In proceeding of the said General Court Martial

Air Cmde Mrigendra Singh, Vsm Vs. Union of India, Represented by the S ...

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Education

records were sought for by respondent No.8 purportedly in exercise of his powers under Section 108 of the Air Force Act, 1950, though he does not, according to the petitioner, have such an authority. The obtaining of the call records … Bedi (supra) and Kiran Bedi v. Committee of Inquiry and Anr., reported in (1989) 1 SCC 494, too. 128. In the case of Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India and Ors., reported in (1987) 4 SCC 611,

indeevarakshan Nair M.P. and Others (Ex. No.13875382 Rect), Kerala Ver ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi

Subject : Land Acquisition

as may be after it is made before each House of Parliament. There are similar provisions in the Air Force Act and Navy Act also. In exercise of the power under Section 191, Army Rules 1954 were framed and … Persons Below Officer Rank ('PBOR') as petitioners in these cases are PBORs. 8. Section 191 of the Army Act, 1950 empowers the Central Government to make rules for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of that … Colonel (Retd.), (2003) 2 SCC 382, C.D.A.(Pension) v. Balachandran Nair,(2005) 13 SCC 128, Union of India v. Keshar Singh, (2007) 12 SCC 675, Union of

H.R. Gokhale Vs. Bharucha Noshir C. and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Election

Acts : Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Sections 83(1), 90, 92 and 100(1); Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 - Rules 53(4), 56(3), 60 and 93; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 6, Rule 2

Reported in : AIR1969Bom177; (1968)70BOMLR466

case (paras 7 and 12) that, under Rule 57 (1) then in force, corresponding to the present Rule 56 (6), all voting papers which had … application filed by the appellant before the Supreme Court under S. 22 of the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act 1950, for permission to discharge the respondent from its service during the pendency of an appeal before the Labour … referred to above. In support of that contention, Mr. Nariman has drawn my attention to the fact that Section 128 not only enjoins secrecy of voting at the time of the recording of votes, but also at the … ; Hidayatullah J. (particularly p. 72), Inayatullah Khan v. Divanchand Mahajan, : AIR1959MP58 ; N. Pethu Peddiar v. V. A. Muthian, : AIR1963Mad390 ; Jabar

Chandulal Jethalal Jayaswal and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India- Articles 19, 265, 301 and 304; Bombay Prohabition Act - Sections 2, 59C and 59D; Gujarat Denatured Spirituous Preparations Rules, 1962 - Rules 22 and 37

Reported in : AIR1964Guj59; (1963)GLR1033

the Gujarat Denatured Spirituous Preparations Rules, 1962. These rules were brought into force with effect from June 1, 1962. They purport to impose certain restrictions … (b) of the Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, as amended by the Indian Criminal Law Amendment (Madras) Act, 1950, stated that the formula of subjective satisfaction of the Government or of its officers with an Advisory Body … Sorabji relied upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in F.N. Balsara v. State of Bombay : AIR1951Bom210 , where that High Court held that Item No. 31 in the Government of India Act, 1935, which … Shelat, C.J.1. These two petitions challenge the validity of Sections 2(10a), 59-C and 59-D of the Bombay Prohibition Act, XXV of 1949, … a distinction, he also relied upon Sections 120, 128-A, 139(d) and 143(b), (c), (hl), (k) and (p).

G.S. Chooramani and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908; Tenancy Law; Uttar Pradesh Government Estates Thekedari Abolition Act, 1958 - Sections 3; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19, 31, 31(2), 31A and 226; Government Grants Act, 1895; Government Grants (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1960 - Sections 2, 3 and 6; Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 - Sections 4

Reported in : AIR1969All43

Bengal v. Premlal Mullick, (1895) ILR 22 Cal 783 at p. 799 (PC), and Krishna Ayyanger v. Nallaperumal, AIR 1920 PC 56. The Supreme Court has similarly rejected the aid of debates in construing a section, see … No. 1 of 1959) (hereinafter called the Thekedari Abolition Act) came into force. By a notification dated 17th June, 1965 the State Government extended the … difficult to introduce the scheme of land reforms enunciated in the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, in those areas. With a view to bring the rights of people in those areas in line with … the Government lessees had proprietary rights (vide District Gazetteer Vol. 34, p. 128). Then, all leases in the Government Estates of 35 other villages in

Property Owners Association Vs. State Of Maharashtra .

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

for public purpose, and shall include the following purposes, namely:- (a) for strategic purposes relating to naval, military, air force, and armed forces of the Union, including central paramilitary forces or any work vital to national security or … West Bengal vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar, AIR1952SC75(“Anwar Ali Sarkar”), this Court struck down the West Bengal Special Courts Act, 1950, holding that it violated Article 14 of the Constitution. Vivian Bose J.in a separate judgment stated that provisions … 42 - List III of Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002 Etc. Page 128 of 139 the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. Alternatively, the acquisition could … said amendment, Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002 Etc. Page 5 of 139 Section - 1A was also inserted in that Act and it contains a

Commanding Officer Railway Protection Special Force Mumbai Vs. Bhavnab ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

the phrase “armed forces of the Union”, “His Majesty’s naval, military or air forces” was used. Therefore, to assert the Republic status of the country, … of a member of the Armed Forces of the Union, therefore, since Section 3 of the Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 (in short, “the 1957 Act”) declared the RPF as an Armed Force of the Union, the deceased … country, post the enforcement of the Constitution of India in the year 1950, replacement of that phrase was considered necessary and was done so by … As regards existence of an alternative remedy under Section 124-A of the 1989 Act, it was argued that Section 128 of the 1989 Act specifically states that the right of any person to claim compensation under Section 124

Sachidanandhan Vs. Vijesh and Another

Court : Kerala

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in :

Cases Relied:
Dilip Bastimal Jain V Baban Bhanudas Kamble and others [AIR 2002 Bom 279].
Vimala Ammal V C. Susheela [AIR 1991 Mad 209].
Dwarka Prasad Singh v. Harikant Prasad Singh [(1973) 1 SCC 179 :. AIR 1973 SC 655].
P.P.S Pillai V Catholic Syrian Bnak [2000(3) KLT 629].
Peter Cherian v. Abraham [2007 (4) KLT 680].
Satheedevi v. Prasanna [2010(2) KLT 642 (SC)].
Ali Rowther v. Kochupennu [1986 KLT 718].
Kali Charanv. Janak Deo [A.I.R. 1932 Allahabad 694].
Babu Lal v. Hazari Lal Kishori Lal [A.I.R.1982 S.C.818].
Potter v. Sanders (6 Ha. 1).
Daniels v. Davison (17 Ves 433).
Holmes v. Powell (8 De G.M. and G. 572).
Thomson Press (India) Ltd. v. Nanak Builders and Investors (P) Ltd., (2013) 5 SCC 397.
(Kafiladdin case, AIR p. 68).
R.C. Chandiok v. Chuni Lal Sabharwal:AIR 1971 SC 1238:(1970) 3 SCC 140.
SCR p. 369 in Durga Prasad v. Deep Chand viz.
S.V.R. Mudaliar v. Rajabu F. Buhari, AIR 1995 SC 1607.

Cases Referred:
Bankim Chandra v. Anand Bazar Patrika [AIR (37) 1950 Calcutta 128].
Thanga Pandiyan v. S.R.Periaswami Thevar [1953 KHC 196: 1953 KLT 475, 2015 KHC 90.
Mohandas K. K. and others V Thankamma Pillai [2015 KHC 90].
Durga Prasad and Anr. v. Deep Chand and Ors. [AIR 1954 SC 75].
Appukuttan v. Kamalakshi [1996(2) KLT 977].
Dilip Bastimal Jain V Baban Bhanudas Kamble and others [AIR 2002 Bom. 279],
W.P. 6225 of 2007 of Bombay High Court, Chendivel R vs G Damodaran and others [AIR 2015 Mad 96], 2010(2) KLT 642 (SC).
Krishna Chandra Kabiraj and others V Sankaran Kabiraj and others [AIR 1950 Calcutta 128].
Chendivel R vs G Damodaran and others [2015 KHC 2237: AIR 2015 Mad 96].
Vigro Industries Pvt Ltd V Venturetech Solutions P Ltd : 2012(5) CTC 359.
State Bank of India V Cracure Pharmaceuticals Ltd : 2013 STPL (Web) 939

Comparative Citation:
2016 (1) KLT 75 (SN) (C.No.79),

Matched in: Citation Cases Relied: Dilip Bastimal Jain V Baban Bhanudas Kamble and others [AIR 2002 Bom 279]. Vimala Ammal V C. Susheela [AIR 1991 Mad 209]. Dwarka Prasad Singh v. Harikant Prasad Singh [(1973) 1 SCC 179 :. AIR 1973 SC 655]. P.P.S Pillai V Catholic Syrian Bnak [2000(3) KLT 629]. Peter Cherian v. Abraham [2007 (4) KLT 680]. Satheedevi v. Prasanna [2010(2) KLT 642 (SC)]. Ali Rowther v. Kochupennu [1986 KLT 718]. Kali Charanv. Janak Deo [A.I.R. 1932 Allahabad 694]. Babu Lal v. Hazari Lal Kishori Lal [A.I.R.1982 S.C.818]. Potter v. Sanders (6 Ha. 1). …

Charu K. Mehta and Others Vs. Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust an ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Education

Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Shanti Devi vs. State AIR 1982 Del.453)Leach CJ speaking for a Division Bench of the Madras High … nothing herein contained shall affect the validity of any such rules in force at the commencement of this Code.” Section 129 begins with a non-obstante … before the Charity Commissioner for the registration of the Trust under Section 18 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The Assistant Charity Commissioner conducted an enquiry under Section 19 and directed the registration of the Trust on … that the rules made under the foregoing provisions are subject to the previous approval of the State Government. Section 128(1) provides that such rules shall not be inconsistent with the provisions in the body of the Code, but