Advanced Search Results

Gunnaji Bhavaji Vs. Makanji Khushalchand

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Civil

Reported in : (1908)10BOMLR969

principles, which have been laid down in several cases, are to be found in Steward v. North Metropolitan Tramways Company (1886) 16 Q.B.D. 556 and in Weldon v. Neal (1887) 19 Q.B.D. 394; and in Clarapede and … this plaint, which is bad on the face of it, to be amended in the way suggested.6. By Section 50 of the Civil Procedure Code, last clause, it is expressly provided: 'If the cause of action arose beyond … Procedure Code, last clause, it is expressly provided: 'If the cause of action arose beyond the period ordinarily allowed by any law for instituting the

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 … responsible for any delay in commencement of operation of the metro line. 50. In so far as issue of “specified matters” raised by the MMRDA … 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

Bengaluru Metro Rail Corporation Ltd vs Assistant Labour Commissioner ...

Court : Karnataka

1890 defines the expression ‘tramway’ under Section 3(1) and it incorporates the definition of ‘tramway’ as defined in Tramways Act, 1886. The definition of ‘tramway’ as - 22 - provided under Section 3(5) of Tramways Act, 1886 does not … Government for only those companies referred to in Section 2(a)(i).(ii) The Central Government’s shareholding in BMRCL is only 50% and BMRCL is not - 21 - specifically referred to in Section 2(a)(i) of the Act, 1947, Central

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd vs Government of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

1890 defines the expression ‘tramway’ under Section 3(1) and it incorporates the definition of ‘tramway’ as defined in Tramways Act, 1886. The definition of ‘tramway’ as - 22 - provided under Section 3(5) of Tramways Act, 1886 does not … Government for only those companies referred to in Section 2(a)(i).(ii) The Central Government’s shareholding in BMRCL is only 50% and BMRCL is not - 21 - specifically referred to in Section 2(a)(i) of the Act, 1947, Central

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd vs Bangalore Metro Rail Corporati ...

Court : Karnataka

1890 defines the expression ‘tramway’ under Section 3(1) and it incorporates the definition of ‘tramway’ as defined in Tramways Act, 1886. The definition of ‘tramway’ as - 22 - provided under Section 3(5) of Tramways Act, 1886 does not … Government for only those companies referred to in Section 2(a)(i).(ii) The Central Government’s shareholding in BMRCL is only 50% and BMRCL is not - 21 - specifically referred to in Section 2(a)(i) of the Act, 1947, Central

M/S Bangalore Metro Rail vs Union of India

Court : Karnataka

1890 defines the expression ‘tramway’ under Section 3(1) and it incorporates the definition of ‘tramway’ as defined in Tramways Act, 1886. The definition of ‘tramway’ as - 22 - provided under Section 3(5) of Tramways Act, 1886 does not … Government for only those companies referred to in Section 2(a)(i).(ii) The Central Government’s shareholding in BMRCL is only 50% and BMRCL is not - 21 - specifically referred to in Section 2(a)(i) of the Act, 1947, Central

M/S Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited vs Assistant Labout Commi ...

Court : Karnataka

1890 defines the expression ‘tramway’ under Section 3(1) and it incorporates the definition of ‘tramway’ as defined in Tramways Act, 1886. The definition of ‘tramway’ as - 22 - provided under Section 3(5) of Tramways Act, 1886 does not … Government for only those companies referred to in Section 2(a)(i).(ii) The Central Government’s shareholding in BMRCL is only 50% and BMRCL is not - 21 - specifically referred to in Section 2(a)(i) of the Act, 1947, Central

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd vs Government of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

1890 defines the expression ‘tramway’ under Section 3(1) and it incorporates the definition of ‘tramway’ as defined in Tramways Act, 1886. The definition of ‘tramway’ as - 22 - provided under Section 3(5) of Tramways Act, 1886 does not … Government for only those companies referred to in Section 2(a)(i).(ii) The Central Government’s shareholding in BMRCL is only 50% and BMRCL is not - 21 - specifically referred to in Section 2(a)(i) of the Act, 1947, Central

Zakirunnissa W/O Late Nawab Jan, Vs. State of Karnataka Rep. by Its Se ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Property

Acts : Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 - Sections 2(7), 3(1), 28(4) and 28(6); Mysore Tramways Act, 1906 - Sections 3(5), 4, 5, 7(2), 7(3) and 47A; Land Acquisition Act; Indian Tramways Act, 1886 - Sections 3(5); Constitution of India -Article 372

Reported in : ILR2009KAR3392:2009(4)KCCR2895:2009(6)AIRKarR252.

and Saharanpur and Anr. reported in : AIR 1967 SC 1747). According to Section 3(5) of the Indian Tramways Act, 1886, 'tramways' means a tramway having one, two or more rails and includes any part of tramway or any … the petitioners herein are the owners of (a) C.T.S. No. 2458, B.B.M.P. Khata No. 16, Corporation Ward No. 50, V.V. Puram, Bangalore, East-West measuring 12.30 x 12.35 sq.mtrs. and North-South measuring 15.90 x 15.90 sq.mtrs, and (b)

M/S Itd Cemindia Jv vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

1890 defines the expression ‘tramway’ under Section 3(1) and it incorporates the definition of ‘tramway’ as defined in Tramways Act, 1886. The - 10 -definition of ‘tramway’ as provided under Section 3(5) of Indian Tramways Act, 1886 does not … Government for only those companies referred to in Section 2(a)(i).(ii) The Central Government’s shareholding in BMRCL is only 50% and BMRCL is not specifically referred to in Section 2(a)(i) of the Act, 1947, Central Government cannot be