Advanced Search Results

State of Gujarat and ors. Vs. the Board of Trustees of Port of Kandla ...

Court : Gujarat

Subject : ConstitutionOther Taxation

Reported in : (1979)1GLR732

Government in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Indian Ports Act, 1908 (1908 Act) extended the provisions of the said Act to the Port of Kandla with effect from 1st … that the day to day administration is not paralysed. Chapter VII is entitled 'Borrowing powers of the Board.' Section 66 entitles the Board with the previous sanction of the Central Government to raise loans for the purposes of

The Trustees of the Port of Madras by Its Chairman Vs. K.P.V. Sheik Mo ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Indian Contract Act - Sections 148, 151, 152 and 161

Reported in : [1963]Supp2SCR915

passengers or goods excepting the services in respect of vessels for which fees are chargeable under the Indian Ports Act, 1908 (XV of 1908).' 18. Section 44 provides that every scale and every statement of conditions framed by the

Trustees of the Port of Madras Vs. Home Insurance Co. Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Subject : ContractLimitation

Acts : Madras Port Trust Act, 1905 - Sections 6, 39, 39(1), 40, 41, 41A, 104, 110 and 111; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 102; Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 151, 152 and 161; Madras General Clauses Act, 1891 - Sections 3(2) and 3(22); General Clauses Act, 1897 - Sections 3(42); Marine Insurance Act, 1963 - Sections 79; Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 92, 130A and 135A; Limitation Act, 1908 - Schedule - Article 120

Reported in : AIR1970Mad48

for short delivery of goods landed in Singapore Harbour by the Singapore Harbour Board which under the Singapore Ports Ordinance was authorised to carry on the business of wharfingers and warehousemen and was carrying on for the … did not at all include suits by the insurer-subrogee within its scope. Article 120 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, the residual article, would apply, and these suits would be perfectly within time.6. But, on deeper scrutiny, I … is given to undertake them.In Griffiths v. Smith, (1941) 1 All ER 66 at pp. 70, 72 and 76, the question was whether the English … equity doctrine of subrogation to Marine Insurance. It was originally expressed in Sections 130-A and 135-A of the Transfer of Property Act, and this concept

Lakshman Gowroji Nakhwa Vs. Ramji Antone Nakhwa

Court : Mumbai

Subject : PropertyCivil

Reported in : AIR1921Bom93; (1921)23BOMLR939

as to removing obstructions and paying compensation will be found in Sections 10 and 12 of the Indian Ports Act, 1908, which was amended by Act VI of 1916, but I do not think I need pursue that.64. Then … to the earth.'57. He next relies on the definition of easement in the Indian Limitation Act IX of 1908. Section 2(5) says: -Easement' includes a right not arising from contract, by which one person is entitled to remove

The Trustees of the Port of Madras, Represented by the Chairman, Madra ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Insurance

Reported in : (1968)2MLJ497

for short delivery of goods landed in Singapore Harbour by the Singapore Harbour Board which under the Singapore Ports Ordinance was authorised to carry on the business of wharfingers and warehousemen and was carrying on for the … did not at all include suits by the insurer-subrogee within its scope. Article 120 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, the residual article, would apply, and these suits would be perfectly within time.6. But, on deeper scrutiny, I … In Griffins and Anr. v. Smith and Ors. (1941) 1 All E.R. 66, the question was whether the English Public Authorities Protection Act, 1893, would … equity doctrine of subrogation to Marine Insurance. It was originally expressed in Sections 130-A and 135-A of the Transfer of Property Act, and this concept

Hindusthan Paper Corporation Ltd. Vs. Wellbrines Chemicals Private Ltd ...

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Major Port Trust Act, 1963 - Section 48; ;Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 30, 33 and 39AA; ;Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 91, 92, 115 and 116

Reported in : (2002)3CALLT114(HC)

Ministry of Shipping and TransPort. The said notification was issued under Section 5 of the India Port Trusts Act, 1908 and Section 2(q) of Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. Under the said notification, the limits of Port of … in the case of Champsey Bhara, reported in AIR 1923 Privy Council 66 are no longer governing the field. The learned counsel for the respondent, … the petitioner invited a tender for transportation of approximately 25,000 MT to 50,000 MT of coal from the Port of Haldia to the Port of Cochin. The said coal was required for the consumption of the subsidiary

Jayantilal Dharamsi and ors. Vs. Board of Trustees of Port of Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Subject : TenancyConstitution

Acts : Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 - Sections 33, 34, 49 and 52; Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Sections 4(1); Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 19

Reported in : 1991(2)BomCR283; (1990)92BOMLR596

upon the declaration about the limits of the Port of Bombay issued under section 5 of the Indian Ports Act, 1908. Now so far as this notification dated 28th October, 1972 issued by the Government of India in the … below petition-wise :1) Jayantilal Dharamsi - W.P. No. 35 of 1983.Year Plot No. G-2. Plot No. H-1.1948 --- 66.441955 166.69 ---1968 222.97 87.08 1972 278.71 108.051976 445.94 181.051977 515.61 208.261978 585.29 235.471979 654.97 262.681980 724.65 289.901981 794.33

The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay Vs. Jayantilal Dharamsey a ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : TenancyProperty

Acts : Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Sections 4; Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 - Sections 2 and 111; Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 - Sections 7; Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 246 and 254; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 1, Rule 8; Bombay Port Trust Act, 1879; Land Acquisition Act, 1894

Reported in : AIR2001Bom26; 2001(1)BomCR44; (2001)2BOMLR273

been periodical amendment to the Act and one of the amendments has the effect of virtually obliging bigger Ports likeMumbai to make use of their spare resources for the development of other major ports. The relevant provisions … policy of interest which we have mentioned later on even with reference to unamended Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 the rate should be 6% per annum only. 63. Now coming to the basis of the aforesaid formula … there is no justification at all for adopting the return of 15%. 66. This increase is sought to be justified by referring to various objects … 1947 like any other local authority, Bombay Port Trust was exempted vide Section 4 of the said Act. 6. Upto 1982 or thereabout, there have

M/s N.n. Global Mercantile Private Limited Vs. M/s Indo Unique Flame L ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

a document, which is compulsorily registerable but which is not registered. Under Section 49 78 of the Registration Act, 1908, an unregistered document may be used for proving a collateral transaction. Even this is impermissible, if the document … Section 20 as we shall notice later. Also, the second part of 66 Section 10 provides that peremptory requirements may still have to be met … Section 11. The Court referred 3 (2005) 8 SCC6187 to the Judgment in Duro Felguera, S.A. v. Gangavaram Port Limited4, to conclude that what was to be gone into was only whether an Arbitration Agreement existed or

The Trustees of the Port of Bombay Vs. the Premier Automobiles Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Bombay Port Trust Act, 1879 - Sections 4, 16A, 18, 28, 29, 30, 61A, 61A(1), 61-B, 62, 63, 64, 64-A, 66, 67, 73, 87, 87(1), 87(2) and 148; Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 19(1); Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 151, 152 and 161; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 20

Reported in : AIR1971Bom317; (1971)73BOMLR1

provisions be subject, such as for instance Sections 62, 63, 64, 64-A, 66 and 67, but when the section says that it is subject to … Premier Automobiles Ltd., the plaintiffs, are engaged in the manufacture of cars in Bombay. The trustees of the Port of Bombay are the defendants. The Plaintiffs imported under a licence 13 cases of machinery from Ming antis … statutory notice upon Port Trust Authorities on 5th June 1960. They alleged that the damage resulted 'owing to acts of negligence, malfeasance and non-feasance on the part of the administration at the Docks and/or acts of misconduct … defendants or its employees and denied that they were liable because of Section 87 of the Bombay Port Trust Act and the Docks bye-laws, particularly