Advanced Search Results

Col. Sawai Bhawani Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct TaxationMiscellaneous

Acts : Gold (Control) Act, 1968 - Sections 8, 8(1), 8(2), 8(3), 16, 16(2), 16(12), 58(2), 71, 73, 74, 78, 79, 85, 86, 99, 111, 112 and 333; ;Income Tax Act 1961 - Section 132; ;Antiquities and Treasures Act, 1972; ;Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 2(2) and 24B; ;Customs Act, 1962; ;Sea Customs Act 1878 - Section 167(8); ;Forest Act, 1927 - Section 59A(2) and 59G; ;Defence of India Rules

under the GCA are not quasi criminal. The above case concerned confiscation proceedings under Section 59G of the Forest Act 1927 as amended by the West Bengal Act 22 of 1988. In the context of those provisions it was … has to be followed before any confiscation can take place or any penalty imposed have to be viewed. Section 78 provides for a statutory adjudication by the Gold Control Officer and Section 79 talks of 'giving an opportunity

Jogender Singh and ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bareilly ...

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Property

Acts : Indian Forest Act, 1927 - Sections 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 16, 17, 20, 27A and 38A; Uttar Pradesh Forest (Amendment) Act, 1965; Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 - Sections 9(1), 9(2), 9A, 9A(2) and 49; Uttar Pradesh Tenancy Act, 1939; Uttar Pradesh Village Abadi Act, 1947; Land Acquisition Act, 1894; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 11; Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Sections 143K, 154, 155, 156, 157, 229B and 241

Reported in : 2002(1)AWC141

41 situated in village Gahloioya, Paragana and Tehsil Powayan, district Shahjahanpur. A notification under Section 4 of Indian Forest Act, 1927. (hereinafter referred to as the Forest Act) was issued by the State Government proposing the area therein to … Bench of the Apex Court in Dhulabhai etc. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr., AIR 1969 SC 78 has laid down principle for determination regarding exclusion of jurisdiction. It was laid down in paragraph 32 (1)

Harish Chandra Singh and ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ba ...

Court : Allahabad

Subject : PropertyCivil

Acts : Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 - Sections 9A(2); Indian Forest Act, 1927 - Sections 4, 6 and 20; Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950; Constitution of India - Article 372

Reported in : 2002(1)AWC562

Nos. 2, 45 and 41 are reserved forest. Notification under Sections 4, 6 and 20 under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, (hereinafter to be referred as the '1927 Act'), has been issued with regard to land recorded as forest … Dhulabhai etc. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. AIR 1969 SC 78, has laid down principle for determination regarding exclusion of jurisdiction. It was … challenging the same order dated 25.6.2001 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bareilly Camp at Shahjahanpur under Section 48 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and the order dated 15.1.2000 passed by the Settlement

State of Uttaranchal Vs. M/S. Kumaon Stone Crusher

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Right to Information

and State of Madhya Pradesh is in question. 3. In exercise of power under Section 41 of Indian Forest Act , 1927 (hereinafter referred to as “1927 Act) rules have been framed by different States. State of U.P. has framed … are all different variations of coal which do not shed their natural characteristic and are all forest produce. 78. Limestone is expressly mentioned in definition of forest produce, slake lime/quick line/hydrated line are all produce of limestone.

Arjun Ratansing Jadhav Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

Subject : Education

for examination previous to the grant of a pass in respect thereof. (viii) As per provisions of Indian Forest Act 1927, Section 69 which states as under ; Sec. 69- Presumption that the Forest Produce belongs to Government - When … be filed as because of such activities the trees die after some days. Respondents claim that, as per Section 78 of the Bombay Forest Rules, 1942, if a forest produce is transported, it is necessary that the pass

State of Tripura and Others Vs. Sudhir Ranjan Nath

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Environment

Acts : Indian Forest Act, 1927 - Sections 15, 19, 37, 39(3 and 4), 41(2), 42, 76, 77, 78 and 548; Tripura Transit Rules - Rules 3(5) and 32; Constitution of India - Articles 19, 110(2), 119(2), 301, 302 and 304; Union Territories (Laws) Act, 1950; Mysore Forest Act - Sections 37; Essential Commodities Act, 1955

Reported in : AIR1997SC1168; JT1997(2)SC530; 1997(2)SCALE154; (1997)3SCC665; [1997]2SCR29; 1997(1)UJ563(SC)

of the Transit Rules framed by the Government of Tripura under Section 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 as illegal and ultravires the Constitution. The correctness of the said decision is challenged by the State of … local area."Chapter XII confers an additional power upon the State government to make rules. Sections 76, 77 and 78 occurring therein read as follows:"76. Additional powers to makerules. -- The State Government may make rules --(a) to

Planters Forum Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Subject : Land Acquisition

reform came up for consideration. It was contended that the provisions of 1960 Act were repugnant to the Forest Act, 1927. Section 4A providing for vesting was introduced in the 1960 Act by amendment in the year 1978. On the … in the context of what the material resources and distribution are. The following was laid down in paragraphs 78 to 80:"8. The mere fact that the resources are material will make no difference in the concept of

Ranchi Timber Traders Association and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Patna

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Forest Act, 1927 - Sections 41 and 78; Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1973 - Rule 1; Constitution of India - Article 19(1); Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 - Sections 35; Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 - Sections 27

vires of Section 41 of the Indian Forest Act, No. XVI of 1927.' 28. In the case of T. V. Balakrishnan (1995 Supp (4) SCC … be given effect to as the same has not been published in the Official Gazette in terms of Section 78 of the Forest Act. It is also asserted on their behalf that the provision of the Forest Act … asserted that the Slate Government in exercise of power under Sections 41, 42 and 76 of the Indian Forest Act (hereinafter referred to as the Forest Act) framed a Transit Rule, 1973 which require permit by a competent

Kaniram and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Subject : Civil

Acts : Forest Act, 1927 - Sections 26, 36 and 76; Madhya Pradesh Grazing Rules, 1979 - Rules 2, 3 and 4

Reported in : AIR1983MP86

Rules, 1979, framed by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred by Section 76 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. For the year 1982, the applications of the petitioners for grant of grazing licences were, however, not accepted

Balbir Singh Vs. H.P. State Forest Corporation

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Subject : Commercial

Reported in : 2006(3)ShimLC50

and subject to such terms and conditions as are prescribed under Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the rules made thereunder by the State Government.19. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Section