Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: hackney carriage act 1879 section 1 · Page 1 of about 6 results (0.026 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Apr 18 1939

Mewa Ram Vs. Municipal Board

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-18-1939

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Reported in : AIR1939All466

irresistible when one compared the provisions of Section 298(2)II(b) of the Act with the provisions of Section 3, Hackney Carriage Act (14 of 1879) which provides about 'rules for the regulation and control of hackney carriages.' The words 'regulation … Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. In the year 1931 the Municipal Board of Muttra purporting to act in exercise of the powers vested in it under Sections

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 22 2026

New Delhi Municipal Council vs Bharat Hotels Ltd & Anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-22-2026

Subject : Land Acquisition

no bye-laws made under clause (a) or clause (b) by the committee of a municipality in which the Hackney Carriage Act, 1879, is in force shall apply to any vehicle to which that Act applies: Provided also that operations of … such licenses]; [(u) regulate the conditions on which and the period for which permission may be given under sub-section (1) of section 172 and sub- section (1) of section 173, and provide for the levy of fees and

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 22 2026

New Delhi Municipal Council vs Bharat Hotels Ltd & Anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-22-2026

Subject : Land Acquisition

no bye-laws made under clause (a) or clause (b) by the committee of a municipality in which the Hackney Carriage Act, 1879, is in force shall apply to any vehicle to which that Act applies: Provided also that operations of … such licenses]; [(u) regulate the conditions on which and the period for which permission may be given under sub-section (1) of section 172 and sub- section (1) of section 173, and provide for the levy of fees and

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Oct 10 1960

Ghulam MohiuddIn Vs. Munsiff of Etah and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-10-1960

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 - Sections 1(2) and 87A; Uttar Pradesh Town Areas Act, 1914 - Sections 38(1), 38(3) and 38(4)

Reported in : AIR1961All200

Boards and Committees.There may be similar transfer of power to the Board under other cognate Acts like the Hackney Carriage Act (Act XIV of 1879) or the Vaccination Act (Act XIII of 1880) and so on. The purpose of … the effect of Sub-sections (3) and (4) was to restrict the power conferred upon the State Government by Sub-section (1) by limiting its operation to the extension to a town area of only those functions which a municipal

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 26 1958

Sardar Iqbal Singh and ors. Vs. the Municipal Board, Lucknow

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-26-1958

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 - Sections 298(1), 298(2) and 301; Constitution of India - Articles 19, 19(1), 19(6) and 226

Reported in : AIR1959All186

in Calcutta in excess of the number of 6000. It appears that under Section 71 of the Calcutta Hackney Carriage Act, 1919, the Provincial Government was empowered to make bye-laws for carrying out the provisions and intentions of the … Board under bye-law No. 9 of the bye-laws published in the U. P. Gazette dated 4-1-1958 (Pausa 14, 1879 Saka Era) through notification No. 403 XXXII-10 (1) (1)-56-57 dated 27-12-1957, the Municipal Board, Lucknow, with a view

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 04 1886

Little Vs. Hackett

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-04-1886

Subject : Land Acquisition

was a member. While there, he dined at the West End Hotel, and after dinner hired a public hackney coach from a stand near the hotel and, taking a companion with him, was driven along the beach … was injured by the collision of a train of the Central Railroad Company of New Jersey with the carriage in which he was riding, and this action was brought to recover Page 116 U. S. 367 damages … Thorogood v. Bryan, 8 C.B. 115, disapproved. On the 28th of June, 1879, the plaintiff below, defendant in error here, was injured by the collision … control over the conduct of the driver, is not responsible for his acts or negligence, or prevented from recovering against a railroad company for injuries … Little v. Hackett - 116 U.S. 366 (1886) U.S. Supreme Court Little v.

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial