Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: vaccination act 1880 section 4 · Page 1 of about 5 results (0.032 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Oct 14 1971

Rangnath Sakharam Pawar Vs. Dnyandeo Baburao Kakade

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-14-1971

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : (1972)74BOMLR449; 1972MhLJ673

special Acts such as Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1890, the Bombay District Vaccination Act, 1892, the Vaccination Act, 1880 in its application to the Vidarbha region, the Hyderabad Vaccination Act, 1951, the Bombay Primary Education Act, 1947 … it involves the decision of an important and an oft recurring question as to the proper interpretation of Section 88 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (Bombay Act No. Ill of 1959).2. Rangnath Sakharam Pawar the … Bhagaji Gorane opponent No. 2 were charged with offences under Sections 323, 447, 504 and 506 (Part (1)) all read with Section 34 of the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jun 14 1983

i.C. Chakravarty Vs. Khasi Hills District Council

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Jun-14-1983

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 9; Autonomous District (Administration of Justice) Rules, 1953 - Rule 1

the purpose of the said Acts and the rules framed thereunder, shall not be interfered with.1. The Bengal Vaccination Act, 1880 (V of 1880). 2. The Bengal Births and Deaths Registration Act, 1873 (IV of 1873), 3. The Assam … extended the provisions of the Assam Sales Tax Act (to the Administered. Area in exercise of power under Section 4 of the Extra provincial Jurisdiction Act, 1947. The appellant Hardeo Das filed writ applications before the High Court

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 10 1960

Ghulam MohiuddIn Vs. Munsiff of Etah and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-10-1960

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 - Sections 1(2) and 87A; Uttar Pradesh Town Areas Act, 1914 - Sections 38(1), 38(3) and 38(4)

Reported in : AIR1961All200

to the Board under other cognate Acts like the Hackney Carriage Act (Act XIV of 1879) or the Vaccination Act (Act XIII of 1880) and so on. The purpose of Sub-section (3) seems to be to constitute a … lead me to take a different view. The learned Judge was of opinion that the provisions of Sections 47-A and 87-A of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, could not be extended to town areas substantially on

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Feb 20 1905

Jacobson Vs. Massachusetts

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-20-1905

Subject : Education

compulsion, but free facilities for vaccination. Compulsion was adopted at Calcutta in 1880, and since then at eighty other towns of Bengal, at Madras in … the authority of the State. It is within the police power of a State to enact a compulsory vaccination law, and it is for the legislature, and not for the courts, to determine Page 197 U. S. … enjoying the benefits of its local government, should have power to dominate the majority when supported in their action by the authority of the State. It is within the police power of a State to enact a … asked numerous instructions to the jury, among which were the following: That section 137 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws of Massachusetts was in … be properly implied therefrom. 1 Story's Const. § 462. We also pass without discussion the suggestion that

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 25 1936

Jessore District Board Vs. Surendra Nath Haldar and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Nov-25-1936

Subject : Civil

Reported in : AIR1937Cal127

are specified in Sections 59 to 100, and embrace a variety of matters including education, sanitation, public works, vaccination, famine relief and others. There is a residuary provision in Section 100(4) which provides that the District Board … to sanction the amount for the purpose alleged, and out of the amount voted only Rs. 400 was actually spent at the date when a temporary injunction was issued. The other questions raised are not material to

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial