Advanced Search Results

Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority Vs. Reliance Energy L ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

through a concession on public private partnership format and approved the said project under the provisions of Indian Tramways Act 1886. 3. On 21st August 2004, MMRDA invited proposals for selection of a bidder for development and operation of … also mentioned that the Metro Railway being a railway under ListI Entry 22 of the Constitution, the said project is governed by the said two … 1. By this petition filed under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner seeks that the effect, implementation and/or operation of

Dehra Dun Mussorie Electric Tramway Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Jagmandar Da ...

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Property

Reported in : AIR1932All141

for determination. The first question is whether the company was a 'promoter' within the meaning of the Indian Tramways Act 1886, and the Tramway order of 1921 made under Sub-section (3), Section 6 of that Act by the Local … not give their previous consent to the transfer of the undertaking by Beltie Shah to the company. On 22nd December 1921 an agreement was entered into between Beltie Shah and the company (Ex. H,P.53) whereby the company

Greenlands Ameerpet Madhuranagar Yusufguda Srikrishna Nagar Joint Acti ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Land Acquisition

run within the municipalities. If it is beyond municipalities, the Parliament alone is competent to legislate. The Indian Tramways Act, 1886, governs the matter. The Parliament enacted the Metro Railways (Operation and Maintenance) Act, 2002. It means that the … which, both the Legislatures are competent to legislate. ‘Railways’ occur in item 22 of the Union List. In addition to that, ‘carriage of passengers and … He contends that the power to regulate Metro Rails is exclusively conferred upon the Metro Railways administration under Section 6 of the Metro Railways Act, and that the 1st respondent is not at all authorised by such

Shiji vs the Project Director

Court : Kerala

Atomic Energy Act, 1962 (33 of 1962).3. The Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948 (14 of 1948).4. The Indian Tramways Act, 1886 (11 of 1886).5. The Land Acquisition (Mines) Act, 1885 (18 of 1885).6. The Metro Railways (Construction of Works) … a bye- pass to avoid the Kazhakkuttam-Karode stretch of the NH 47 in Thiruvananthapuram city.3. Declaration under Sub Section 1 of Section 3D of the National Highways Act was approved and published in the official Gazette of

Revajeetu Builders and Developers Vs. Narayanaswamy and Sons and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : PropertyCivil

Acts : Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 - Sections 20(1); Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999; Contract Act - Sections 65; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) Act, 1999; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 6, Rule 17 - Order 12, Rule 6 - Order 21 Rule 8; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1882 - Sections 53; Constitution of India - Article 227

Reported in : 2009(4)AWC4002(SC); JT2009(13)SC366; (2009)8MLJ907(SC); 2009(II)OLR(SC)815; RLW2010(1)SC322; (2009)10SCC84; 2009(10)LC4850(SC):2009AIRSCW6644; [2009] 15 SCR 103; MANU/SC/1724/2009

393; Arundhati Mishra v. Sri Ram Charitra Pandey : (1994) 2 SCC 2939. In Steward v. North Metropolitan Tramways Co. (1886) 16 QB 178, the plaintiff filed a suit for damages against the tramways Company for negligence … after obtaining permission from the State of Karnataka under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976.5. A petition in public interest was filed by one S. Vasudeva which ultimately came up before this … the first defendant firm applied to the State Government for exemption, under Section 20(1) of the said Act, and sought permission to hold excess vacant … nutshell are as under:The appellant (original plaintiff) filed an Original Suit No. 2265 of 1996 before the XXXI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore against the

Roshan Lal and ors. Vs. Emperor

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : AIR1946All161

'prohibit' the movement of or transport. The Court of appeal in England in Reg. v. Croydon and Norwood Tramways Co. (1886) 18 Q.B.D. 39, has also affirmed this principle. In that case Lindley, L.J., observed : 'If … Court also in Niharendu Dutt v. Emperor ('42) 29 A.I.R. 1942 F.C. 22 at p. 23 has observed thus:By Section 102, Constitution Act, if the … arhar were despatched from Bhitaura railway station. Of these four wagons, it is in evidence, two of them actually arrived at their destination and delivery was actually taken by the consignees. The other two wagons also arrived … vires the powers of the Governor in view of the provisions of Section 297, Constitution Act. The learned Counsel has in the next place contended

The Madras Port Trust Vs. A.M. Safiulla and Co. and anr.

Court : Chennai

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Indian Companies Act; Madras Port Trust Act, 1905 - Sections 6, 39(2), 41-A(1), 110 and 111; Madras Harbour Trust Act, 1885 - Sections 87; Madras Harbour Trust (Amendment) Act, 1886; Madras Harbour Dues Act, 1882; Indian Railways Act, 1890; Public Authorities Protection Ordinance - Sections 2; Calcutta Port Trust Act - Sections 142; Madras General Clauses Act - Sections 3(22)

Reported in : AIR1965Mad133

the Harbour, Madras v. Best and Co. ILR 22 Mad 524 which arose under the Madras Harbour Trust Act, 1886 (Act II of 1886). The suit in that case was to recover a balance of coal alleged to … finding of the learned Judge is extremely unsatisfactory and we must observe that the failed to read the section properly observe that he failed to read the section properly and of course completely misunderstood its scope and

Mervanji Mancherji Cama Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Counci ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Property

Reported in : (1912)14BOMLR654

in which the representation was made or claims under some person so concerned: see Longman v. Bath Electric Tramways, Limited (1905) 1 Ch. 646. The plaintiffs do not claim under the Bank by whom Gostling was employed … India Company (1839) 5 B N.C. 262.34. In 1858 (by 21 and 22 Vict. c. 106, an Act for the better Government of India), the … three certified extracts from rent rolls kept in pretended compliance with the provisions of Section 39 of Bombay Act II of 1876 and from a notice from the Collector, dated the 19th of January 1889, issued under

The Madras Port Trust Vs. A.M. Safiulla and Company, a Partnership Fir ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Trusts and Societies

Reported in : (1962)2MLJ29

of the Harbour, Madras v. Best & Co. I.L.R.(1899) Mad. 524 which arose under the Madras Harbour Trust Act, 1886 (Act II of 1886). The suit in that case was to recover a balance of coal alleged to … demur to the maintainability of the suit and contend that the suit claim is barred by limitation under Section 110 of the Madras Port Trust Act, 1905.4. The learned City Civil Court Judge overruled the plea of

K.N. Shukla Vs. Navnit Lal Manilal Bhat and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 166, 167 and 182; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 195, 195(1) and 197

Reported in : AIR1967SC1331; 1967CriLJ1200; (1967)0GLR571; (1967)IILLJ261SC; [1967]2SCR290

which states : 'The existing enactments regulating the construction and operation of railways in India are the Indian Tramways Act of 1886 and the Indian Railways Act of 1890 as amended from time to time. Subject to the … and in some cases with the approval of the Railway Board. Exhibits 22, 23 and 24 which are the copies of the appointment orders of … Operating Superintendent, Western Railway, Rajkot. It was alleged in the complaint that the appellant had committed offences under Sections 166, 167 and 182, Indian Penal Code. The appellant objected before the trying Magistrate that the complaint under