Bombay Prevention Of Fragmentation And Consolidation Of Holdings Act 1947 Maharashtra Section 15a Preparation Of Scheme And Principles To Be Followed In Its Preparation - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: bombay prevention of fragmentation and consolidation of holdings act 1947 maharashtra section 15a preparation of scheme and principles to be followed in its preparation Page 1 of about 196,247 results (0.094 seconds)State of Bombay Vs. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwalia and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1956Bom1; (1955)57BOMLR288; ILR1955Bom680
or moneys paid by the residents of the State of Bombay, and it is difficult to understand how it could possibly significant to note that although the Act is called 'The Prevention of Gambling Act', 'gambling' is nowhere defined in the Act 30,000 in the. State of Bombay;2. the licensee shall not hold more than one prize competition during the period of two with gambling and that was the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887, and we must look at that Act in order to exercise its power, to impose a higher tax under Section 12A, such higher tax ' would not be justified and as possible.It is said that the solution is not previously prepared, that the solution is not arrived at by any chance, a lottery and a person who competes even in a scheme like this. Nothing that the former does or can do found .a place in Part IV which contains various directive principles of State policy which are not justiciable.Apart from articles which determine who should get the first prize a procedure is followed which is not mentioned in the rules at all, and
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRadhabai Mohandas Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1955Bom439; (1955)57BOMLR827; 1955CriLJ1564; ILR1955Bom1039
He is therefore a person domiciled in the State of Bombay within the meaning of Section 4(b) of the Act.19. The up a charge-sheet against the respondent under Section 5, Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, 1946. I will refer to to attach within its territorial limits legal consequences to certain acts done outside these limits.33. In this case, the Act has according to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Sections 28 to 30 of the Code specify the Courts which to a colony, and, indeed, inconsistent with the most, familiar principles of international law' (p- 457).It was therefore necessary to limit offence with which he was charged. The learned Magistrate has followed, as indeed he was bound to the decision of Shah
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTEmperor Vs. Ismail Hirji
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1930Bom49; (1929)31BOMLR1349
Patkar, J.1. In this case the Presidency Magistrate, Second Court, Bombay, has made a reference, under Section 432 of the Criminal the power of arrest under Section 10 of the Bombay Prevention of Prostitution Act XI of 1923, and that any case that which it bears in the Criminal Procedure Code, I hold then that there was a complaint on oath as required arrive at the true intention of the enactment. Though the Act was amended several times' since the decision in Fernad's case, a person who is authorized to issue a warrant under Section 6 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act could himself I.L.R(1912) . 37 Bom. 402 the learned Judges were not prepared to base their judgment upon a view of Section 6 arrest and the search himself, if necessary, according to the principle of the legal maxim that 'whatever a man sui juris the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Magistrate ought to have followed the clear ruling of this Court in Emperor v. Abasbhai.5.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe State Vs. Jayantilal Govinddas
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1953Bom82; (1952)54BOMLR790; ILR1953Bom91
No. 1 and offered a bet of Rs. 2 on Bombay 7. Accused No. 1 accepted the bet and received the were cases of convictions under Section 5 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act in which a question definitely arose whether presumption under Section 7 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act it was not necessary that the things seized must be my friends. 2-3 persons came and told me that P. Section I. was calling me and I inquired when I was currency note in a street is false. We are not prepared to accept this contention of Mr. Purshottam. In our view, a marked coin upon the person of the accused. That principle has been modified in a subsequent decision of this Court accused. In the view of the learned Sessions Judge, who followed -- 'Emperor v. Harilal', the punter was a police agent
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTIn Re: Shaikh HuseIn Shaik Mahomed
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1951Bom285; (1951)53BOMLR57; ILR1951Bom175
forebear from preventing the entry of the externee into Greater Bombay & from taking any action in pursuance of the order Drugs Act, 1930, or (iv) Section 4 or 12-A, Bombay Prevention of GamblingAct, 1887, to remove himself in like manner from provisions of Article 15(1) of the Constitution. We must, therefore, hold that to the extent of this repugnancy, the subsection is Bombay, on 24-7-1950, under Section 27(2-A), City of Bombay Police Act, IV [4] of 1902. He has now challenged that order are referred to in Sub-section (2-A). In taking action under Section 27 (1), he had got to be satisfied that the 20-7-1950, a notice was served upon the externee in the following terms : 'Name, address & age:--Sk. Husein s/o Sk. Moho-med
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState Vs. Gauri Kom Krishna Bhandari and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1957Bom66; (1956)58BOMLR1046; 1957CriLJ362; ILR1957Bom98
was lodged against the persons arrested for offence under the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887. It was alleged that the an officer who may be specially authorised under the Bombay Prevention or Gambling Act. The evidence of Sub-Inspector Desai and the 7, in our judgment, must arise. We are unable to hold that the exclusion of one or more of the powers place where the instruments of gaming were found. They were actually in the house at the time when the police officer Emperor v. Pokka Kusaluppa 49 Bom LR 150 : AIR 1947 Bom 329 (B). In our view these cases do not was carried out. This Court held that a presumption under Section 7 of the Act arises only where there has been J. in Emperor v. Pokka Kusalappa Bant (B), to the following effect :'In fact a warrant for search under Section 6,
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTEmperor Vs. Thavarmal Rupchand
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR158
cotton business is carried on. It is not uncommon in Bombay and indeed in other cities also for business to be a general and vague warrant.6. Section 6 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act empower the Commissioner of Police in the forty bales neither contemplated giving nor taking delivery, but he holds that accused is a broker and placed the transaction with the resolution was mere camouflage and not intended to be acted upon, That, however, is not a question in this case. acquittal of the accused Thavarmal Rupchand on a charge under Section 4(a) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act IV of being followed at present the rough draft of the scheme prepared in connection with the same was read out and... it which being followed at present the rough draft of the scheme prepared in connection with the same was read out and... Sodas at the rates of settlement on Saturday which being followed at present the rough draft of the scheme prepared in
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState Vs. Narsing Lingo Deshpande
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: (1957)59BOMLR141
an offence under Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act. For the purpose of this appeal, (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925, were stated by me in the that on the evidence before us we are unable to hold that the dye Metanil Yellow is injurious to health within proviso contained in Sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act.8. In these circumstances, the prosecution relies upon the fact that respondent under Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925, were such matter or ingredient is required for the production or preparation thereof as an article of commerce in a state fit Sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act reads as follows:Provided that no offence shall be deemed to have been committed
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe State Vs. Narayandas Mangilal Dayame
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1958Bom68; (1957)59BOMLR901; 1958CriLJ161; ILR1957Bom880
held that although the alleged offence was committed when the Bombay Act was in force, the mere fact that the complaint to consider the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, which is Act 25 o in this State after the coming into force of this Act,(b) if it is contracted beyond the limits of this State marriage outside the State of Bombay. It is said that Section 4(b) applies the Act to persons domiciled in the State what is important to note and which is underlying the scheme of the Constitution is that the Central Legislature had overriding to a colony, and, indeed, inconsistent with the most familiar principles of international law.' And the Lord Chancellor in his judgment apply to him by reason of the fact that he follows a particular religion. It is true, as the Government Pleader
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSyedna Taher SaifuddIn Vs. Tyebbhai Moosaji Koicha and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1953Bom183; (1953)55BOMLR1
as an Act to prohibit excommunication in the Province of Bombay, and in the Preamble it draws attention to the practice . What was challenged in that case was the Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, and Article 35 was also had obtained a licence to sell spirits, and was actually holding it at the time when tho Act came into force, defendant 1 is that, looking to the language of the Act, it is clear that the mischief aimed at by the the Legislature itself with which this legislation was passed. [4] Section 2 is the defining section, and it defines 'community' as been excommunicated or expelled. It is difficult to understand the principle why the Legislature should protect the righis and privileges only
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>