Advanced Search Results

Villianur Iyarkkai Padukappu Maiyam Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : CivilCommercial

Acts : Major Ports Trust Act; Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 - Sections 18, 46 and 50; Business of the Government of Pondicherry Rules, 1963 - Rule 5 and 5(2); Indian Major Ports Act, 1908; Indian Ports Act, 1908 - Sections 3(9); Pondicherry (Administration) Act, 1962 - Sections 5; Pondicherry Administration Regulations Act, 1963 - Sections 3; Pondicherry (Laws) Regulation, 1963 - Regulations 2 and 6; Pondicherry (Alteration of name) Act, 2006 - Sections 4; Environment Protection Act; General Financial Rules, 1963; Supreme Court Orders, 1960 - Order 16; Supreme Court Rules, 1960 - Rule 4(1); Delegation of Financial Rules - Rule 21; Constitution of India - Articles 162, 239, 239A and 240

Reported in : JT2009(8)SC339; (2009)7SCC561; 2009(8)LC3627(SC); [2009] 9 SCR 225

minor ports can be undertaken by the respective State Government after formulating its own guidelines and modalities. The Indian Ports Act, 1908 permits the State Government to develop the minor ports. By virtue of power vested in the Parliament by … not justified in pressing into service those provisions. An attempt was made to demonstrate that in terms of Section 5 of the Pondicherry (Administration) Act, 1962 all properties and assets in the State of Pondicherry vest with the

Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs. Raj Rani

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : ConsumerProperty

Reported in : IV(2004)CPJ27(SC); 2004(8)SCALE214; (2005)9SCC536

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … are not entitled to canvass before Supreme Court that selection of S as developer was not correctly made. Section 5 & Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986: Contract for development and privatization of Pondicherry Port - Held, Contention of the

Debaraj Padhi and ors. Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Reported in : JT1995(9)SC521; (1996)ILLJ11SC; 1995(5)SCALE290; (1995)6SCC41; 1995(2)LC625(SC)

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … are not entitled to canvass before Supreme Court that selection of S as developer was not correctly made. Section 5 & Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986: Contract for development and privatization of Pondicherry Port - Held, Contention of the

Haryana Tourism Corporation Ltd. Vs. Fakir Chand, Etc. Etc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Companies Act; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Reported in : AIR2003SC4465; JT2003(Suppl2)SC424; (2004)ILLJ195SC; 2003(8)SCALE582; (2003)8SCC248; (2004)1UPLBEC160

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … are not entitled to canvass before Supreme Court that selection of S as developer was not correctly made. Section 5 & Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986: Contract for development and privatization of Pondicherry Port - Held, Contention of the

illahi ShamsuddIn Nadaf Vs. Sou. Jaitunbi Makbul Nadaf

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Family

Reported in : 1994(3)ALT48(SC); (1995)97BOMLR937; JT1994(4)SC371; 1994(3)SCALE254; (1994)5SCC476; [1994]Supp1SCR597

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … are not entitled to canvass before Supreme Court that selection of S as developer was not correctly made. Section 5 & Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986: Contract for development and privatization of Pondicherry Port - Held, Contention of the

Sampath Kumar Vs. Ayyakannu and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : CivilProperty

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 6, Rule 17

Reported in : AIR2002SC3369; 2002(6)ALD63(SC); 2002(4)ALLMR(SC)866; 2003(1)AWC18(SC); 2002(51)BLJR93; [2003(1)JCR283(SC)]; JT2002(7)SC182; (2002)3MLJ160(SC); RLW2003(1)SC49; 2002(6)SCALE; (2002) 7 SCC 559

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … are not entitled to canvass before Supreme Court that selection of S as developer was not correctly made. Section 5 & Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986: Contract for development and privatization of Pondicherry Port - Held, Contention of the

Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Vs. Raghunath Balmiki and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 340; Supreme Court Rules, 1966 - Order 47

Reported in : JT1998(6)SC268; 1998(5)SCALE190; (1999)1SCC177; (1998)3UPLBEC2206

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … are not entitled to canvass before Supreme Court that selection of S as developer was not correctly made. Section 5 & Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986: Contract for development and privatization of Pondicherry Port - Held, Contention of the

Sun Export Corporation and anr. Vs. Board of Trustees of the Port of B ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 111 and 125; Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 - Sections 3(2); Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 - Sections 2, 63; Bombay Port Trust Act, - Sections 3(5)

Reported in : AIR1997SC4044; 1997(96)ELT3(SC); JT1997(8)SC530; 1997(6)SCALE553; (1998)1SCC142; [1997]Supp4SCR682; 1997(2)LC786(SC)

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … are not entitled to canvass before Supreme Court that selection of S as developer was not correctly made. Section 5 & Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986: Contract for development and privatization of Pondicherry Port - Held, Contention of the

Smt. Dhan Mal Devi JaIn Vs. Gordhan Dass and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973; Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 - Sections 2(1)

Reported in : JT1987(1)SC623; 1987Supp(1)SCC632

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … Ganpat Ladha v. Sashikant Vishnu Shinde : [1978]3SCR198 upon a construction of the word 'tenant' as defined in Section 5(11)(c) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 regarding the nature of statutory tenants

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 - Sections 16(1) and 18(2)

Reported in : [1993]202ITR254(SC)

to be undertaken while developing a port cannot be stopped by merely naming them as real estate business. INDIAN PORTS ACT, 1908 Sections 4(1), 6(1) & 3(9) & (8): Minor ports - Jurisdiction to undertake development and privatization of Pondicherry … are not entitled to canvass before Supreme Court that selection of S as developer was not correctly made. Section 5 & Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986: Contract for development and privatization of Pondicherry Port - Held, Contention of the