Advanced Search Results

H.K. Madhia Vs. Financial Commissioner and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

manner. One of the main contention of the petitioner is that RCS had no power u/s 41 of the DCS Act, 2003 and Rule 19 and 25 of the DCS Rules, 2007 to cease his membership. Further, that RCS has … (1973 Rules) since he was granted membership before the new Act came into force. Reliance is placed on Section 141 of new, Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 which protects the acts done under the previous Act and clause

Bimal Kumar Jana vs Santa Dey & Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

the transfers.24. Fraud was committed when DCS Act, 1972 and Rules, 1973 were in force. By virtue of Section 141 of DCS Act, 2003, repeal does not protect past frauds. Proceedings were rightly initiated under Rule 25 of … order dated 29th May 2015 it was heldthat the period of 180 days prescribed under Section 86(3) of the DCS Act, 2003 is mandatory and begins from the date of receipt of the expulsion resolution by the RCS. Failure of

S.Balasubramanian Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

of the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Chennai, in Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2005 and Crl.A.No.289 of 2003 respectively, set aside the conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioners and acquit them. For Petitioners : Mr.A.Ramesh … the Company being arrayed as an accused.".12. Before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the consideration was in respect of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which reads as follows:- ".141. Offences by companies.--(1) If the person committing an

Delhi Dayalbagh Coop. House Building Society Ltd. Vs. the Registrar Co ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Section 79 qua what had transpired under the BCS Act of 1925. A similar provision was contained in Section 141 of the said Act when DCS Act of 1972 was repealed. Since the Bye-Laws were registered under BCS … 1925) as extended to Delhi. On enactment of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as, the DCS Act of 1972), the provisions of the DCS Act of 1972 and the Rules framed thereunder came to govern … Rules framed thereunder came to govern the field. This Act was also repealed by The Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as, the said Act) as amended by The Delhi Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, 2006 (hereinafter

P.K.Mohamed vs State of Tamilnadu,

Court : Chennai

a completion certificate but kept the application for planning permission pending. From 2003 till 2007, when the GovernmentOrder imposing infrastructure charges was passed, there wasabsolutely … the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, do not apply to writ petitions as is clear from Section 141 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, it has been settled by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court … the petitioners can be forfeited, it would be always open to CMDA, the respondent No.2, to take appropriate action against the petitioners if there is violation of any building regulation or sanctioned plan. Moreover, the learned counsel

Madan Lal and anr. Vs. Baldev Raj

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 - Sections 13(2); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 148

Reported in : (2004)137PLR834

per the citation Roshan Lal v. Ashok Kumar, 1995(2) R.L.R. 57=0995-2)110 P.L.R. 141, no such request was made by the appellants in writing either to … M.M. Kumar, J.1. This is tenants petition filed under Section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for brevity, 'the Act') challenging concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below holding that … their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India while deciding the case Vinod Kumar v. Prem Lata, 2003(21) R.C.T. 329. It was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India having discussed the citation Rubber House

N.R. Mahesh Vs. N. Ashok

Court : Chennai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act - Sections 138, 141, 141(1) and 141(2)

Reported in : IV(2007)BC252

legal fiction envisaged in Section 141 of the Act.This judgment has been followed in the judgment reported in 2003 SCC (Cri) 1007 T. Stanes and Co. Ltd v. A. Jaffarullah.14. Therefore, in the instant case, though the … Now there is no scope for doubt regarding that aspect in view of the clear language employed in Section 141 of the Act. In the expanded ambit of the word 'company' even firms or any other associations of

M/S. Sterling Holiday Resorts (India) Ltd. and Another Vs. M/S. Bharat ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

Revision is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to set-aside the order passed in C.A.No.322 of 2003, dated 10.03.2006 by the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, modified the sentence passed by the learned XVIII … Section 138 of the Act ? 28. As a matter of fact, the proviso of Sub-section (1) of Section 141 contains an escape route for persons, who are able to explain their innocence to the complainant, that the

Venkateshwara Alloys (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Goa and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Electricity

Acts : Companies Act, 1956; Indian Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 2(1), 21, 22, 22A, 22B, 23, 24, 24(1), 51A and 53; Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 56, 56(1) and 185(2); Electricity Rules - Rules 29 and 31; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : AIR2009Bom106

ignored as being non est. In making this point he relied upon the Judgment reported in 2004 GLR 141 : : AIR 2003 SC 2162, Dr. Nishikant Sukerkar v. Government of India, In his view such void … and such position of law continues to exist in the analogus provisions under Section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2003; and as such under both the laws old as well as new there is no provision for permanent

C.P. Srinivas Rao Vs. S.S. Nagaraj

Court : Karnataka

Subject : CriminalCompany

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 and 141(2); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1972 - Sections 482

Reported in : III(2005)BC173; 2004CriLJ4389; ILR2005KAR1166

of the Supreme Court in the case of Katta Sujatha (Smt.) v. Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Limited, ILR 2003 Kant 4856 relied on for the petitioner does not help him much.4. Probably for that reason, the learned … the conduct of the business of the first accused - Company. But, Section 141(2) of the N. I. Act says that where any offence under that Act has been committed by a Company and it is proved