Skip to content
How to use Narrow results with filters
  1. Run a keyword search first to load the results page.
  2. Select Supreme Court, a High Court, or tribunal on the left.
  3. Optionally filter by decision year to focus on recent or historical cases.

Cantonment Board - Judgment Search Results

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.

Apr 23 2019

Cantonment Board,meerut . Vs. Afzal

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Apr-23-2019

3867/2019; 3868/2019; 3869/2019; 3870/2019; 3871/2019 JUDGMENT R. Subhash Reddy, J.1. This batch of appeals, is filed by the Cantonment Board, Meerut and others, aggrieved by the common order 1 C.A.Nos.3814 of 19 etc. dated 19.12.2013 passed by the … No.3814 of 2019. The notice issued to the said respondent reads as under : “ Office of the Cantonment Board Meerut, dated 22nd Aug, 2006 To Afzal Ahmad S/o Faqruddin, 55/pt Ghosi Mohalla, B.I. Bazar, Meerut Cantt. Subject


Mar 15 2021

Secunderabad Cantonment Board Vs. M/s B. Ramachandraiah And Sons

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Mar-15-2021

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 900-902 OF2021(@ SLP (CIVIL) Nos.27960-62 of 2019) SECUNDERABAD CANTONMENT BOARD …APPELLANT VERSUS M/S B. RAMACHANDRAIAH & SONS …RESPONDENT JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.1.Leave granted. 2.These appeals arise out of … Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“Arbitration Act”].. On 02.09.2000, the appellant before us, Secunderabad Cantonment Board [“Appellant”]., floated a notice inviting tender [“N.I.T.”]. for an annual term contract for:1. Repairs to Main Roads (Resurfacing


Feb 01 2010

Cantonment Board, Meerut and anr. Vs. K.P. Singh and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Feb-01-2010

Reported in: JT2010(2)SC130; 2010(2)SCALE68; (2010)2SCC518

entitled to the refund of the amount deposited by them over and above the bid given by them. Cantonment Board, the appellant herein has been directed to dispose of the application made by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 … favouring the refund of amount, few facts would be necessary.3. Under Section 60 of the Cantonment Act, the Cantonment Board was empowered to impose toll tax. Accordingly, on 08.01.2005, a Gazette Notification was issued for the imposition of


18-section briefs on any result in this list

Nov 28 2003

Secunderabad Cantonment Board, Andhra Circle, Secunderabad Rep. by Exe ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Nov-28-2003

Reported in: 2004(3)ALT27(SC); JT2003(9)SC316; 2003(10)SCALE33; (2003)12SCC315; (2004)1UPLBEC882

said decision. The controversy revolves around the refusal to sanction the plan submitted by different parties to the Cantonment Board for construction of building over the land in question. The central government raised its claim over the land … which the respondents proposed to raise construction and had submitted plans therefore, talk in the limits of Secunderabad Cantonment Board. There is a bungalow No. 215 in Thokaila Village, which is said to have been purchased in the


Mar 11 2008

Ramgarh Cantonment Board and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Mar-11-2008

Reported in: JT2008(3)SC590; 2008(4)SCALE162; (2008)11SCC223; (2008)15VST550(SC); 2008AIRSCW2223

central question which arises for adjudication in this appeal is regarding the power, competence and authority of the Cantonment Board to levy entry tax on vehicles entering into the cantonment area.3. Appellant No. 1, Ramgarh Cantonment Board, a … the Cantonment Board to levy entry tax on vehicles entering into the cantonment area.3. Appellant No. 1, Ramgarh Cantonment Board, a board constituted under the Cantonments Act, 1924 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), in exercise of the


May 13 2011

Cantonment Board and Another Vs. Church of North India

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: May-13-2011

the lessee shall vacate the premises before the expiry of the lease as and when required by the Cantonment Board provided seven days' notice to this effect is given in writing.3. The case of the appellants is that … The appellants needed the premises. After the expiry of the lease on 31.3.1984, the Estate Officer of the Cantonment Board stopped accepting the rent.4. The appellants served a notice of seven days as required under Section 4 of


Aug 09 2012

Cantonment Board, Jammu and ors. Vs. Jagat Pal Singh Cheema

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Aug-09-2012

filed by the respondent challenging the punishment of removal from service that was imposed on him by the Cantonment Board, Jammu. It may be noticed, at the outset, that the High Court had allowed the Writ Petition of … respondent on the ground that the order of the Officer Commanding-in-Chief, the Command, affirming the order of the Cantonment Board removing the respondent from service was passed on the basis of an invalid reference made to the Officer


Sep 17 1991

Cantonment Board, Dinapore and Others Vs. Taramani Devi

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Sep-17-1991

Reported in: AIR1995SC61; 1992Supp(2)SCC501

Boards on terms and conditions embodied in the respective sanctions. Section 181 of the said Act authorises the Cantonment Board to grant such sanction by resolution. The resolution is suspendible under Section 52(1)(b) of the Act by the … such view that these appeals are before us by the Union of India in one case and the Cantonment Board and others in the other.5. Apart from the fact that these appeals have been pending before this Court


Mar 22 1995

Cantonment Board, Secunderabad Vs. G. Venketram Reddy and Others

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Mar-22-1995

Reported in: AIR1995SC1210; 1995(2)SCALE507; (1995)4SCC561; 1995Supp(2)SCC576

'the Act').2. It is the answer to this question that would determine the jurisdiction and power of the Cantonment Board of Secunderabad (in brief 'the Board') to levy and collect octroi on substitute of ghee and all kinds … the previous sanction of the Central Government. There was no dispute that the octroi was levied by the Cantonment Board after obtaining sanction of the Central Government. But what has been found is that the ambit of the


Jan 02 1996

Cantonment Board and Another Vs. Mohanlal and Another

Court: Supreme Court of India

Decided on: Jan-02-1996

Reported in: 1996IAD(SC)436; AIR1996SC1586; JT1996(1)SC77; 1996(1)SCALE153; (1996)2SCC23; [1996]1SCR1

is seen that the respondent in his reply had admitted that they constructed, as pointed out by the Cantonment Board in its notice dated September 13, 1974, and the previous notice. But he stated that he had done … the notice was issued and the reply thereof was given by the respondent.3. It is seen that the Cantonment Board is an elected body represented by people themselves. When opportunity was given putting on notice of illegal construction


  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »
Loading chart…

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


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial