Advanced Search Results

V. Dhayalan. Vs. Muniswamy and anr.

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code Of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Section 96, Order 41 Rule 33, Order 41 Rule 22(1); Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Section 52

Reported in : 2010(2)KCCR864; ILR2009KAR4527

he has not already filed an appeal against the decree.14. In BANARASI AND OTHERS VS. RAM PHAL AIR 2003 SC 1989, the Apex Court was considering an almost similar case. In the said case, it has been … bound by the decree just as much as she was a party to the suit as provided in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for short T.P.Act). The defendants have not challenged the decree of

Bombay Environmental Action Group, a Society Registered Under the Soci ... Overruled

Court : Mumbai

Subject : CivilProperty

Acts : Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - Sections 2, 2(7), 2(9A), 2(12), 22, 22A, 29, 31, 31(5), 33, 37, 37(1), 37(1A), 37(1AA), 37(2), 38, 50, 58(1), 125, 126, 126(1), 127, 128 and 149; Bombay Town Planning Act, 1915 - Sections 3; Bombay Town Planning (Amendment) Act, 1954 - Sections 7; Bombay Town Planning (Amendment) Act, 1955; Mysore Town and Country Planning Act, 1961; Constitution of India (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976 - Article 48A; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 21, 31, 47, 48A, 51A, 141, 142, 226 and 368; Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1904-1952;Greater Bombay Development Control Regulations, 1991 - Regulations 1, 52, 52(4), 53(1), 56, 57, 58, 58(1), 58(2), 58(3), 58(4), 58(5), 58(6), 58(7), 58(8), 59(9) and 62(3); Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearan

Reported in : 2005(6)BomCR574; (2005)107BOMLR337; (2006)4CompLJ117(Bom)

as amended in 2001.b) Assuming that the Petitioners interpretation is accepted, then whether the clarification dated 28th March, 2003 effects an amendment to amended DCR 58, which is not permissible under DCR 62(3)?c) Assuming the Respondents interpretation … challenges to original DCR 58 are dealt with in paras 47 to 52 of the judgment. In paragraph 51 of the judgment, while dealing with … cope up and for almost a week the entire city was completely crippled.2. The first Petitioner Bombay Environmental Action Group is a public charitable trust duly registered and also a registered society. Its aims and objects are, … 58 means, then whether the amendment to DCR 58 is permissible under Section 37 of the MRTP Act?d) Assuming the amendment to DCR 58 was

Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd Vs. Asset Reconstruction CoIndia Ltd

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

(n) Therefore, when SPIC Petrochemicals Limited committed default in repayment, ICICI Bank filed an application in O.A.No.9 of 2003 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Mumbai. In the said application, the Debts Recovery Tribunal appointed a Receiver by … by ICICI Bank in favour of ARCIL, was after the institution of two suits and hence hit by Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act; and (vii) that the assignment agreement shows that the consideration paid by

Chennai Petro Corporation Ltd. Vs. Icici Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : IV(2004)BC126

taking initiative, recalled their loan by sending legal notice and thereafter by filing Original Application No. 9 of 2003 in the DRT-III, Mumbai. Considering the bleak scenario, the respondent No. 1 Bank, during the pendency of the … the mortgage created by SPIC in favour of ICICI would be declared null and void. He relied upon Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Mr.D'vitre vehemently argued that the said transfer namely mortgage by SPIC

Central Organisation for Railway Electrification versus M/S Eci Spic S ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

Reported in : [2024]11S.C.R.2173; (2025) 4 SCC 641

and Conciliation Act, 1996; Indian Contract Act, 1872; UNCITRAL Model Law; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Spanish Arbitration Act, 2003. In the Judgment of Hrishikesh Roy, J. Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996; UNCITRAL Model Law; Arbitration Act, 1996. List … appointment of arbitrators. [Para 75] - [Per Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. (concurring)] The text and the context of Section 18 as is evident from the scheme of the Act eschews application of Section 18 at the time … Raja Transport (P) Ltd. [2009] 13 SCR 510 : (2009) 8 SCC 520; Denel (Proprietary) Ltd. v. Bharat Electronics Ltd. [2010] 6 SCR 784 :

New Tirupur Area Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. K.Poomani

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

of any order issued by the Government under Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act 2003, neither the Revenue Authorities nor the Police Authorities got any power to obstruct the petitioner from drawing ground

C.V. Raghavaiah and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Finance Departme ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Service

Acts : Indian Electricity (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2000; Indian Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 39 to 49 and 49D; Constitution of India - Article 14; Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (Salaries and Allowances and Conditions of Services of Chairman, Vice Chairman and Members) (Amendment) Rules, 1989 - Rules 8 and 12(2); ;Indian Electricity Act, 2003; Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Special Court Chairman and Members (Conditions of Service Rules) 1996 - Rule 3; Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (Salaries and Allowances and Conditions of Services of Chairman, Vice Chairman and Members) Rules, 1988 - Rule 8; Land Grabbbing (Prohibition) Act

Reported in : 2005(3)ALT435

in paying pension equivalent to APAT Members. Further, specific stand taken that pursuant to the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 which came into effect from 10-1-2003, G.O.Ms. No. 118 Energy (Power-ll) Department, dated 18-10-2003 was issued whereby under … Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, New Delhi issued G.O.Ms.No. 52, General Administration (SPF.B) Department, dated 31-1-2001 amending Sub-rule (2) of Rule 8 … made certain submissions supporting their respective contentions. The Special Court under Indian Electricity A.P. Amending Act, 2000 under Section 49d(i) of Indian Electricity Act, 1910, was provided for speedy enquiry into alleged offences under Section 39 -

City Municipal Corporation of Chennai Rep. by Its Commissioner 'Ripon ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

the licence fee payable by the defendant was worked out to Rs.73, 52, 260/-. As such, payment of balance sum of Rs.21,30,805/- was demanded from … agreement with the plaintiff Corporation. However, by a letter dated 22.10.1996, the defendant raised a doubt about the actual number of poles available in some of the roads and contended that the actual poles available were only … and a demand for payment of the licence fee together with interest and advertisement tax leviable as per Section 129-A and 129-B of Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 was made. Though the receipt of the letter

K.B.Mujitha Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Subject : Land Acquisition

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2506- 2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DCS WP(C).No. 14514 of 2013 (L) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED165.2013 FILED … of June, 2015 JUDGMENT The property involved in this writ petition is 52 cents of land in R.S. Nos. 473/9-7, 473/9-8, 473/9-1 and 473/9-3 in … the various transactions aforequoted.3. The petitioners subsequently claimed the benefit of Section 7E of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (the 'Act' for short). Ext. P1 application was filed before the Taluk Land Board claiming the benefit

Thagendra Budhmagar Prisoner Vs. State (Through Public Prosecutor)

Court : Mumbai Goa

Subject : Land Acquisition

with and, therefore, the conviction of the accused, is unsustainable in law. According to learned Counsel, Sections 50, 52, 55 and Section 57 of the Act have not been complied with by the prosecution and, as such, … convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) (ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('the Act' for short) and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years