Advanced Search Results
Lal Shah Baba Dargah Trust Vs. Magnum Developers and Others
Supreme Court of India
Dec-15-2015
Land Acquisition
notification issued by the Central Government dated 14.05.2015 by which several amended acts sought to repeal including the Wakf Amendment Act, 2013 which came into force on 01.11.2013. According to the learned counsel, the said notification of the Central Government … granted.3. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal granting injunction, the defendant-respondents moved the High Court under Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, 1995 by way of civil revision, which was registered as C.R. No.395 of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskVinjamuri Rajagopala Chary and Others Vs. Principal Secretary, Revenue ...
Andhra Pradesh
Dec-23-2015
Land Acquisition
Haryana and Himachal Pradesh where such graveyard has been leased out before the date of commencement of the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 2013. (1A) Any sale, gift, exchange, mortgage or transfer of waqf property shall be void ab initio: Provided that … of property, in respect of immovable property owned by the State or Central Government if executed by persons other than those statutorily empowered, cannot be … land in certain cases. Once the land is surrendered to the Government it stands vested in Government under Section 11 of the Act. When once the surplus lands covered by such declarations are included in the list of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSmt Janaki Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Karnataka
Jan-19-2021
Land Acquisition
to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other … arise for our consideration:"Whether the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 387 2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same … 42.AIR1966SC43 NATHULAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. 43.(2004) 1 SC CASES597 COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P) LTD. 44.(2005) 7 SC CASES203 STAR INDIA … and they cannot be held criminally liable. 4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Sri V G Siddhartha Hegde Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Karnataka
Jan-19-2021
Land Acquisition
to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other … arise for our consideration:"Whether the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 387 2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same … 42.AIR1966SC43 NATHULAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. 43.(2004) 1 SC CASES597 COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P) LTD. 44.(2005) 7 SC CASES203 STAR INDIA … and they cannot be held criminally liable. 4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMr C V Manjunatha Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Karnataka
Jan-19-2021
Land Acquisition
to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other … arise for our consideration:"Whether the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 387 2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same … 42.AIR1966SC43 NATHULAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. 43.(2004) 1 SC CASES597 COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P) LTD. 44.(2005) 7 SC CASES203 STAR INDIA … and they cannot be held criminally liable. 4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAdarsh Developers Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Karnataka
Jan-19-2021
Land Acquisition
to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other … arise for our consideration:"Whether the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 387 2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same … 42.AIR1966SC43 NATHULAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. 43.(2004) 1 SC CASES597 COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P) LTD. 44.(2005) 7 SC CASES203 STAR INDIA … and they cannot be held criminally liable. 4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSri Aruachalam Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Karnataka
Jan-19-2021
Land Acquisition
to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other … arise for our consideration:"Whether the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 387 2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same … 42.AIR1966SC43 NATHULAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. 43.(2004) 1 SC CASES597 COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P) LTD. 44.(2005) 7 SC CASES203 STAR INDIA … and they cannot be held criminally liable. 4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskN Kamalasambasiva Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Karnataka
Jan-19-2021
Land Acquisition
to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other … arise for our consideration:"Whether the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 387 2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same … 42.AIR1966SC43 NATHULAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. 43.(2004) 1 SC CASES597 COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P) LTD. 44.(2005) 7 SC CASES203 STAR INDIA … and they cannot be held criminally liable. 4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSri Harish Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Karnataka
Jan-19-2021
Land Acquisition
to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other … arise for our consideration:"Whether the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 387 2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same … 42.AIR1966SC43 NATHULAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. 43.(2004) 1 SC CASES597 COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P) LTD. 44.(2005) 7 SC CASES203 STAR INDIA … and they cannot be held criminally liable. 4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSri Jayaram Vs. The State Of Karnataka
Karnataka
Jan-19-2021
Land Acquisition
to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other … arise for our consideration:"Whether the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 387 2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same … 42.AIR1966SC43 NATHULAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. 43.(2004) 1 SC CASES597 COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P) LTD. 44.(2005) 7 SC CASES203 STAR INDIA … and they cannot be held criminally liable. 4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »