Cantonments Act 1924 Section 95 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: cantonments act 1924 section 95 Year: 2001 Page 1 of about 589 results (0.533 seconds)State of Jharkhand and anr. Vs. Mukesh Prasad and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-04-2001
Reported in: II(2002)ACC184; 2002(50)BLJR169
a municipality the cantonment board under section 60 of the cantonments act thus had no jurisdiction power or authority whatsoever to section 82 section 137 or the first schedule to 1922 act may be these provisions were not brought to his notice vested in it under section 60 of the cantonments act 1924 invited tenders for collection of vehicles tax from the vehicles relevant enactment by virtue of the power created under sub section 1 of section 60 the same power would stand vested
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTShri Surya Prakash Khatri and anr. Vs. Smt. Madhu Trehan and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ3476; 2001(59)DRJ298
way of the other will determine whether or nor the act complained of amounted to contempt we would like to observe could or would treat that as contempt of court indeed section 5 of the act now provides that a person shall
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState of Rajasthan Vs. Gaharoo
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-23-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ3672; 2002(5)WLC460; 2001(3)WLN153
it may not be even necessary to catalogue the overt acts therein non mentioning of some facts or vague reference to serve out the remaining period of sentence penal code 1860 section 376 rape evidence prosecutrix aged about 11 years went to
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJ.K. Udaipur Udhyog Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-2001
Reported in: [2003]131STC176(Raj); 2003(1)WLN281
regulation placed before the court raises rebuttable presumption that official acts like publishing has been regularly performed 48 in the aforesaid 1scr74 169 that was a case where constitutional validity of section 1 3 of the haryana urban control of rent and ii or otherwise is the depreciated value of fixed assets 95 explanations i ii in case of a new industrial unit
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAbdul Rehman Fakir Mohd. Durani Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-25-2001
Reported in: 2001BomCR(Cri)517; (2001)2BOMLR752; 2001CriLJ4844
in accordance with the provisions of n d p s act it was further observed that if the search was carried must record the grounds of his belief as required by section 42 2 in this matter search and seizure took place outward number 438 of 1995 exhibit 21 outward no 437 95 dated 1 8 1995 is special report to superior on
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTDy. Cit Vs. Kanjimal and Sons
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: (2001)74TTJ(Del)328
the penal provisions of sections 271 273 etc of the act the authorised representative of the assessed could not say anything section and the penalty is imposed under an entirely different section the defense which the assessed could have put forth in
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTT. Ramakrishna Rao Vs. Principal Secretary to Govt. of A.P. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-15-2001
Reported in: 2001(5)ALD299; 2001(4)ALT654
it is also unfortunate that the state has failed to act even in terms of the recommendations of the various committees fine whoever a contravenes any provision of any of the sections sub sections or clauses mentioned in the first column of
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRoad Metal Industry Vs. Secretary to Government of A.P., Revenue Depar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-09-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)ALD166; 2001(5)ALT670
other corporated body has been registered under the indian companies act vii of 1913 28 rule 4 of the alienation rules confers or is conductive to the good of a considerable section of the community at large or of the locality or
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAsstt. Cit Vs. Hewlett Packard Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-14-2001
Reported in: (2002)75TTJ(Del)786
dtaa over section 9 1 vi of the income tax act but nevertheless he wanted to address the bench over the part of the definition which occurs in explanationn 2 to section 9 1 does not figure under article viiia of dtaa
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAirports Authority of India Vs. S.N. Malhotra and Sons and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-12-2001
Reported in: 2002(61)DRJ883
arbitrator went into the same and decided it than the act must be taken to be without jurisdiction and hit by act there is no such reference to section 13 in section 34 of the act thereforee the obvious conclusion is that
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT