Bombay Prevention Of Fragmentation And Consolidation Of Holdings Act 1947 Maharashtra Section 35 Power Of State Government Or Commissioner To Call For Proceedings - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: bombay prevention of fragmentation and consolidation of holdings act 1947 maharashtra section 35 power of state government or commissioner to call for proceedings Page 1 of about 196,247 results (0.126 seconds)State of Bombay Vs. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwalia and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1956Bom1; (1955)57BOMLR288; ILR1955Bom680
tax under Section 12. In other words, a resident of Bombay may in conceivable cases pay a smaller tax than a significant to note that although the Act is called 'The Prevention of Gambling Act', 'gambling' is nowhere defined in the Act should not have the right under Clause (1) to acquire, hold and dispose of property, or under Clause (g) to practise lottery, and therefore we havecome to the conclusion that the Act applies to thescheme promoted by the petitioners. But the petitioners the Act as amended, in the definition section, which is Section 2, there is an inclusive definition of 'prize competition' and in relation to the power of the Legislature. It says:'The power of the Legislature of a State to make laws as subject to Article 301.In other words, neither Parliament nor the State Legislature can legislate so as to interfere with the freedom were familiar with the topic of lottery, because in the Government of India Act in List I to the VIIth Schedule of Parliament to make laws with respect to taxes on income accruing from or arising out of professions, trades, callings and 276(1) that the validity of that tax should not be called into question merely on the 'ground that it is a what is taxed hero is openly and obviously the gross proceeds in the hands of the petitioners. What is taxed is
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRadhabai Mohandas Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1955Bom439; (1955)57BOMLR827; 1955CriLJ1564; ILR1955Bom1039
firm of Wallace and Co., which carried on business in Bombay.In the previous year for the purposes of income tax the apply. 37. There are three kinds of offences under the Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act. These are mentioned in Sections definition of the expression 'domiciled in this Province' in the Act. The whole Act deals with the subject of marriage and under Section 6 or 7 of this Act.' Offences under Sections 6 and 7 are punishable with imprisonment which may extend principle is with regard to the scope and ambit of powers of the Legislature. It will therefore apply in respect of territory possessing its own system of laws, that as the State Legislatures in India are also empowered to make laws, each country or state to another under the same sovereign or government, as from Scotland to England, or from one of the Australian High Court in -- 'Broken Hill South Ltd. v. Commissioner of Taxation (N. S. W.)', (1936) 56 CLR 337. It is intra vires' is not a question which we are called upon to decide in this appeal and we do not in a State' and resident in 'someother State' to institute proceedings in a matrimonial cause in 'that other State' under certain
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTEmperor Vs. Ismail Hirji
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1930Bom49; (1929)31BOMLR1349
referred is, whether offences punishable under Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act IV of 1887 as modified up is, whether offences punishable under Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act IV of 1887 as modified up to been described as one by which two persons, professing to hold opposite views touching the issue of a future uncertain event, though uncovered, might as well be 'a place' within the Act as a place either covered with canvas as a tent and the Magistrate has jurisdiction to investigate the case under Section 190, Clause (b). It is not, therefore, necessary to go by Fawcett J. that there were serious limitations on the power of arrest under Section 10 of the Bombay Prevention of the learned Counsel for the accused that there is no statement on oath by the informer. It is, however, contended that necessary to go into the question urged by the learned Government Pleader that even on the assumption that the offences were personally raided the premises in company with other police-officers. The Commissioner entered the main entrance and Sub-Inspector Salaskar. entered the side
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe State Vs. Jayantilal Govinddas
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1953Bom82; (1952)54BOMLR790; ILR1953Bom91
to accused No. 1 and offered the said bet on Bombay 7. The evidence of the panch witness is to the an offence under 6. 12, Clause (a) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, in the Court of the Fifth Additional 6. 12, Clause (a) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, in the Court of the Fifth Additional City Magistrate, Ahmedabad. and taken saying that I was called by the P. Section I. ant', was taken to the Police Chowky and the Vyas, J.(1) This is an appeal by the State of Bombay against an order of acquittal passed by the entrance to Sankdi Sheri. On receiving that information, the Sub-Inspector called the punter and the 'panchas' and in the presence of
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTIn Re: Shaikh HuseIn Shaik Mahomed
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1951Bom285; (1951)53BOMLR57; ILR1951Bom175
Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930, or (iv) Section 4 or 12-A, Bombay Prevention of GamblingAct, 1887, to remove himself in like manner either under Section 4 or Section 12-A of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887, or under the Bombay Prohibition Act, provisions of Article 15(1) of the Constitution. We must, therefore, hold that to the extent of this repugnancy, the subsection is XVII, Penal Code, (ii) Section 65 or 68, Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, (iii) Chap. III, Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930, or (iv) persons born outside the Greater Bombay. Sub-section (1) of this section provides inter alia that whenever it shall appear to the Govt., Pleader contended that under Section 27 (1) there was power in the Comr. of Police to extern even those persons Article 15(1) of the Constitution which says : 'That the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of terms : '(2) It shall also be competent to the Commissioner of Police to direct the removal & prohibit the entry of explaining these allegations & you are hereby required to call upon me at that time at Dongri P. Stn. for
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState Vs. Gauri Kom Krishna Bhandari and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1957Bom66; (1956)58BOMLR1046; 1957CriLJ362; ILR1957Bom98
the powers under Clauses (a) to (d), of Section 6, Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, be conferred upon him. But the the learned trial Magistrate that the presumption under Section 1, Prevention of Gambling Act did not arise on the facts of 7, in our judgment, must arise. We are unable to hold that the exclusion of one or more of the powers has stated that he exercised the powers under the Gambling Act.The lacuna from which the prosecution case in Emperor v. Pokka Emperor v. Pokka Kusaluppa 49 Bom LR 150 : AIR 1947 Bom 329 (B). In our view these cases do not case (B) the warrant issued was headed a 'Warrant under section 96 of the Criminal Procedure Code', and there was no hold that the exclusion of one or more of the powers granted under the warrant from the powers conferrable under Section Sub-Divisional Magistrate Mr. Potdar was a defective warrant and the state was not entitled to rely upon the presumption arising out 7 of the Act.7. Mr. Jahagirdar also contended that the Government of Bombay has by notification prescribed a form of warrant went to Avarsa on 26-8-1955 with a Police party. He called the panchas, and the police party then surrounded the house.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTEmperor Vs. Thavarmal Rupchand
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR158
keeping a common gaming house under Section 4(a) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, IV of 1887.2. The main points a common gaming house under Section 4(a) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, IV of 1887.2. The main points for behalf to rebut the presumption which naturally arises, I must hold that this book falls within the definition of an instrument only and have no relation to genuine transactions leading to actual delivery. They are, therefore, wagering contracts and as such within persons taking part in them fall under the definition in Section 3 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act. It has of all instruments of gaming found upon such search.7. The powers given under this section are very wide and are apt the entries appearing in this book either in his written statement or in the evidence of the witnesses he called. Mr. the East India Cotton Association, Sir Purshottamdas Thakurdas, wrote to Government that the Mahajan Association was merely an Association for gambling marked currency note for Rs. 100 given by the Deputy Commissioner of Police to the witness Akbarbhai was also found at prior to the raid, and that no merchant has been called to prove that he actually gave or took delivery. In any delivery in contemplation, and the question is whether the proceedings of the Association are consistent with any intention to give
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState Vs. Narsing Lingo Deshpande
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: (1957)59BOMLR141
be.Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925, provides:Any person who sells or (ft) of Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Adulteration Act, 1925, and Clauses (a) and (6) of that on the evidence before us we are unable to hold that the dye Metanil Yellow is injurious to health within is material for the application of Section 4 of the Act is whether the presence of an ingredient, in an article first or a second offence.Clause (6) of Sub-section (1) of Section 4 says:Any person who manufactures or offers, keeps or exposes Yellow is positively harmful to the animate world. The third authority referred to by Dr. Rodd in support of his opinion He is an M.B.B.S. of the Bombay University. He has stated in his evidence that his practice in doing analysis in is made of Azodyes and much less of the dye called Metanil Yellow. Dr. Rodd has next referred to Rule 7
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe State Vs. Narayandas Mangilal Dayame
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1958Bom68; (1957)59BOMLR901; 1958CriLJ161; ILR1957Bom880
could equally have applied that law to every person in Bombay who contracted a bigamous marriage outside the State of Bombay. to consider the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, which is Act 25 o the competence of the Stale Legislature under the Constitution. The Act was passed in 1946, and, therefore, we must look to is the ordinary definition of what a bigamous marriage is. Section 4 provides :'Notwithstanding any law, custom or usage to the under our present Constitution Parliament has been given absolute territorial powers. Therefore, to-day Parliament may enact any extra territorial law. The in our law by reason of the fact that the State or the Provincial Legislature has been given the power to and, therefore, we must look to the provisions of the Government of India Act. The competence of the State Legislature is and also the case of Broken Hill South Ltd. v. Commissioner Of Taxation (1936) 56 CLR 337. Now, these are cases to apply its law to those whom it chose to call domiciled in the State but which means permanently residents in is not a law which a Province can make. To proceed with the judgment:'The object of Section 4(b) is to compel
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSyedna Taher SaifuddIn Vs. Tyebbhai Moosaji Koicha and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1953Bom183; (1953)55BOMLR1
was that the excommunication was bad in view of the Bombay Prevention of Excommunication Act (Bom. Act 42 of 1949), having . 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, transactions in the future. It could not possibly apply to acts or transactions in the past. But, as we shall presently future in order to attract the penalty laid down in Section 4. [8] in our opinion, the whole approach of Mr. the Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, and Article 35 was also relied upon in that case. We held in Dawoodi Bohra community. Now, the Privy Council was considering tho powers of excommunication that the Dai-ul-Mutlaq possessed, and it was also health or a policy of social welfare upon which the State has embarked, then the religious practice must give way and of 1949 is valid and that tho Legislature, under the Government of India Act, was competent to enact this legislation. [18] protects his power of excommunication. The Privy Council were not called upon, as obviously they could not, to consider that ques.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>