Advanced Search Results

Sanjay JaIn and Another Vs. Bar Council of Delhi and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Advocate Act, 1961 - Sections 5; Bar Council of Delhi Rules, 1963 - Rules 36, 36A, 36(C), 36(D), 37, 37A, 44, 46, 47A, 48, 49, 52, 126, 127 and 129; Constitution of India - Article 226; Telegraph Act, 1885; Evidence Act, 1872

Reported in : 1998VIIAD(Delhi)345; AIR1998Delhi111; 1998(46)DRJ656

contemporanea expositio is not applicable to recent statutes. The Supreme Court declined to apply the principle to the Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Evidence Act, 1872 in the cases of Senior Electric Inspector Vs . Laxmi Narain Chopra, : … and declares that they shall be constituted for a period of two years from the date of election. Rule 48 also provides for the term of a committee other than an ad-hoc committee and proclaims that it shall

Mrs Jethronica vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

necessitating acquisition and payment of compensation in accordance with law.5.25. Drawing a comparison with Section 16 of theIndian Telegraph Act, 1885 and Section 10 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, … appearing on behalf of Shri Chidanandayya for the appellant and Shri - 48 - Adithya Sondhi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Shri B.L.Sanjeev … submitted that there is violation of Sections 68 and 69 of the Electricity Act, 2003 as well as Rules 3 and 10 of the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules, 2006') in laying

Sri T N Chandrashekargowda vs the Bangalore Water Supply

Court : Karnataka

necessitating acquisition and payment of compensation in accordance with law.5.25. Drawing a comparison with Section 16 of theIndian Telegraph Act, 1885 and Section 10 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, … appearing on behalf of Shri Chidanandayya for the appellant and Shri - 48 - Adithya Sondhi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Shri B.L.Sanjeev … submitted that there is violation of Sections 68 and 69 of the Electricity Act, 2003 as well as Rules 3 and 10 of the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules, 2006') in laying

T. Narayanan Vs. the District Executive Magistrate-cum-district Collec ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Civil

Acts : Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 - Sections 10, 16, 16(1), 16(2), 16(3) and 35; Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 10 to 19 and 164; Indian Electricity Rules, 1956; Woks of Licensees Rules, 2006 - Rule 3(2); Indian Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 12 to 16, 18 and 19; Electricity Supply Act - Sections 45; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 188; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 136, 226 and 227

Reported in : (2008)4MLJ1024

forth his objections, in respect of exercise of powers of Telegraph authority under Section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted his explanation stating that if the power line towers are erected in the approved … existing provisions under the Electricity Act, Sections 10 to 19 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 and the Woks of Licensees Rules, 2006. (b) Sriperambudur to Kalivanthapattu 400 KV D/C Power Transmission Line … densely populated areas.(d) Since the transmission line requires a clear corridor of 48 metres only i.e. 24 metres on either side from the centre of

Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd., Vs. Devendrappa S/O Channabasapp ...

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Subject : Land Acquisition

file of the Principal District Judge, Dharwad, allowing the petitions in part under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, holding that the petitioners - claimants shall be entitled for :11. : compensation of `1,000/- per gunta towards … farmers and further contended that it is a case where this Court can exercise powers under Order 41 Rule 33 :21. : of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and enhance the compensation relying on the dictum

Basappa Alias Chandrahsekhar and Ors vs State of Karnataka and Ors

Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi

to the public at large, and if every objection/resistance has to be- 48 -entertained under Section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, then it … electricity lines.34. Sri D.R.Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel alsocontended that under Sections 10, 11 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, laying of electric transmission lines by the licensee under the Electricity Act, prior consent of the land owner … vide Annexure-E directing them to verify the request made by the petitioners and take action as per the Rules and furnish necessary feed back to the petitioners. -9-15. In the suit O.S.No.201/2023, respondent Nos.2 and 3filed their

Ravi Shankar Srivastava Vs. State of Raj. and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 2, 7, 7(1), 8, 13(1), 13(1)(2), 13(2) and 482; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - 120B; Judges Protection Act, 1985 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 3(2); Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003; Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 - Sections 6, 6A and 26; Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 - Sections 5, 5(1), 5(2), 23, 24 and 25; Information Technology Act - Sections 65(1)(4) and 92; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 617; All India Services Act, 1951 - Sections 2, 5 and 6; All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 - Rules 2, 3 and 6; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 154, 155(2), 157, 162, 173, 173(2), 197 and 197(1); Rajasthan Land Revenue Industrial Area Allotment Rules - Rule 13(1); Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951 - Rule 419A; Consti

Reported in : RLW2005(3)Raj1736; 2005(2)WLC612

petitioner further submits that the tapping of the telephone is also contrary to the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. More particularly he referred Section 5(2), which is reproduced as under:'On the occurrence of any public emergency, or … no abuse of position because the judgment rendered by the petitioner were absolutely correct and in conformity with Rule 13(1) of Rajasthan Land Revenue Industrial Area Allotment Rules (in FIR No. 110/04) as well as power of … of FIR whereas the jurisdiction is available to the petitioner under Section 482.50. In support of his submissions he placed reliance on the judgment rendered

T.Bhuvaneswari Vs. District Collector Cum District Magistrate of Erode ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

of electricity, confer upon the 'Licensee' any of the powers which the Telegraph Authority possesses under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.10. The 3rd respondent has further submitted that the Government of India, in exercise of powers conferred by Section … available under law in case any damage is sustained to their property. 48. In W.P.No.5827 (W) of 2009, dated 25.08.2009 [Calendula Realtors Private Limited v. … as in the case on hand.21. The 3rd respondent has further submitted that as per Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 3 of the said Rules, ".nothing contained in Rule 3 shall affect the powers conferred upon any Licensee

Aircel Cellular Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India, Thro' Secretary, ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Education

the issuance of a Writ of Declaration declaring that the first proviso to Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, insofar as and to the extent that it confers unguided power upon the Dept. of Telecommunications to claim … Vs - Union of India and Anr. (2012 (6) SCC 613), wherein the Supreme Court held that the rule of law and the heart of parliamentary democracy is 'legal certainty', as mandated by the Indian Constitution and … Airtel Ltd. - Vs - Union of India (2015 SCC Online SC 487 :: CA No.2803/2014). CONTENTIONS ADVANCED IN W.A. NOS. 1454 and 1455 OF

M/S. Bharti Airtel Ltd., Rep by Its Head-legal and Regulatory, S. Naga ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Service Tax

granted by the Department of Telecommunication, Government of India, Ministry of Telecommunications under Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. 13. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for … State Legislature has power to levy tax on the sale of goods. 48. It is not in dispute that service or telecommunication service as such … the State to levy Sales Tax/VAT on telecommunication service, interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions and upholding the rule of law. Therefore, they are taken up for consideration together and disposed off by this common order. 2.