Building Code - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: building code Year: 1942 Page 1 of about 113 results (0.262 seconds)Chandulal Vadilal Vs. Government of the Province of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-05-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Bom138; (1943)45BOMLR197
..... we must assume that the land was assessed for building purposes and there appears to be no section of the land revenue code and no rule which entitles the collector to levy ..... section 65 of the code and rule 82 made under that act when upon land already assessed for building purposes the owner proceeds to erect new buildings though those new buildings may be of .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTIn Re: Varadaraja Padayachi
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-17-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Mad521
..... of housebreaking as well as of theft in a building as section 454 penal code requires that a sentence of imprisonment should be given ..... mayavaram of an offence punishable under sections 454 and 380 penal code and was released under section 562 criminal p c upon ..... exceeding seven years whereas an offence punishable under section 454 penal code is punishable with ten years rigorous imprisonment i do not .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCarpenters and Joiners Vs. Ritter's Cafe
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Mar-30-1942
..... connection with the dispute texas has not attempted to protect other business enterprises of the building contractor plaster who is the petitioners real adversary we need not therefore consider problems that ..... holding the petitioners activities to constitute a violation of the state antitrust law texas penal code art 1632 et seq the texas court of civil appeals enjoined them from picketing ritter .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe Salem Municipal Council Vs. G.F.F. Foulkes
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-11-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Mad674; (1943)2MLJ183
to make a beneficial use of these as of the building itself not during his absence but when he returns and conclusion of the learned district munsiff and accordingly dismiss the civil revision petition with costs most of these authorities turn upon
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBengal Jute Mills Vs. Jewraj Heeralal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal13
its merits the relevant provisions of order 3 of the code are as follows rule 1 any application to any court
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTProvince of Bengal Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-1942
Reported in: AIR1942Cal418
127 b 5 of 20 x the annual rentthat the buildingwould fetchi e the annual rentthus ultimately the method suggested by relates to the assessment of 27 chowringhee known as the indian museum the area of the land in the premises is
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTDr. Brij Behari Lal Vs. Emperor Through Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All123
..... be provided for larger municipalities where there would be many more building disputes than in smaller municipalities and it is difficult to conceive ..... section 107 civil p c or in the sections of the criminal procedure code mentioned above according to the requirements of any given case for ..... that the municipalities act has provided a self contained code for the redress of wrongs and a citizen has to .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe Secretary of State for India Vs. Sri NaraIn Khanna
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-1942
Reported in: (1942)44BOMLR788
and that the only compensation due was compensation for the buildings which alone were compulsorily acquired they would appear to have
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNasiruddIn Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All47
to expire that he proceeded to the completion of his building but there is no evidence on the record on the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRao Bahadur V. Ranganathan Chettiar and ors. Vs. Mariappa Mudali and o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-23-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Mad386; (1943)1MLJ102
him requiring him to surrender possession of the land and building and offering to pay compensation for the building and trees protection act 1921 had not been complied with the city civil court accepted the plea of the defendants that the suit
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>
Sign-up to get more results
Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.
Start Free Trial