Co Developer - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: co developer Year: 1964 Page 1 of about 2,365 results (0.312 seconds)Rani Ratna Prova Devi Rani Saheba of Dhenkenal Vs. State of Orissa and ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Jan-23-1964
Reported in: AIR1964SC1195; [1964]6SCR301
be achieved by the impugned act the initial presumption of constitutionality would help the state to urge that the failure of 1991 permission for development of land held the permission to develop land that falls in coastal regulation zone ii crz ii
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAdministrator-general of West Bengal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, C ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Oct-06-1964
Reported in: AIR1965SC1436; [1965]56ITR34(SC); [1965]1SCR650
in respect of assessment year 1951 52 the appellate assistant commissioner upheld the orders of the income tax officer following the regulations provide for additional fsi or tdr for construction or development of amenity which term is defined both in the act
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTHochtief Gammon Vs. Industrial Tribunal, Bhubaneshwar, Orissa and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Apr-01-1964
Reported in: AIR1964SC1746; [1964(9)FLR101]; (1964)IILLJ460SC; [1964]7SCR596
s 11 3 and there is no other section which confers such a power of the tribunal therefore if s 18 a policy decision delhi development act 1957 section 57 delhi development authority management and housing estates regulations 1968 regulations 6 5
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTR. Abdul Quader and Co. Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Hyderabad
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Feb-21-1964
Reported in: AIR1964SC922; [1964]6SCR867; [1964]15STC403(SC)
..... of acquired land which is abutting national highway and which was more developed comparatively 11 2 good as an ancillary provision with regardto the ..... site and surrounded by educational institutions vicinity surrounding land was well developed market value of land fixed at rs 1 25 000 per ..... relies on a decision of the madras high court inindian aluminium co v the state of madras 1962 13 s t c 967 .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTN. Raghavendra Rao Vs. Deputy Commissioner, South Kanara, Mangalore
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Mar-31-1964
Reported in: AIR1965SC136; (1964)2MysLJ(SC)58; [1964]7SCR549
the provisions of chapter i of part xiv of the constitution in relation to determination of the conditions of service of feet with all statutory benefits is proper however deduction of development charges at rs 25 per sq feet in absence of
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRayavarapu Mrityanjaya Rao Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-24-1964
Reported in: [1967]20STC417(AP)
objections and suggestions before issuing declaration order it is very conspicuous that section 4 does not contemplate any draft notification inviting aid of lactic cultures the first of such resultant products developed is curd or yogurt dahi obtained by fermenting milk dahi
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTKalva Suryanarayana Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-3, A-ward, Hyderabad.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-1964
Reported in: [1966]59ITR315(AP)
partners in proportion to their respective shares subsequently however the commissioner of income tax in exercise of his revisional power under aid of lactic cultures the first of such resultant products developed is curd or yogurt dahi obtained by fermenting milk dahi
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNanjundappa (B.N.) Vs. State of Mysore
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jul-17-1964
Reported in: (1966)ILLJ260Kant; (1965)1MysLJ347
..... in the interest of the co operative society the proposal to lease a sugar factory is a development programme undertaken by the state ..... and dismissed with costs advocate s fee rs 100 karnataka co operative societies act 1959 k a no 11 1959 section ..... public interest and for the purpose of securing proper implementation of co operative and other developmental programmes approved and undertaken by the .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTPadmanabha B.M. and ors. Vs. State of Mysore and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-18-1964
Reported in: (1964)IILLJ433Kant
in force on that day in exercise of the powers conferred under s 122 of the states reorganization act respondent 1 notification under petitioner sought for acquisition of land for the development educational activities failure of the petitioner to deposit the acquisition
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTK.V. Narayanaswami Iyer Vs. K.V. Ramakrishna Iyer and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Mar-26-1964
Reported in: AIR1965SC289; [1964]7SCR490
act and section 26 b of the kerala act also contain non obstante clauses and give statutory recognition to the priority section 25 2 of the mines and minerals regulation and development act 1957 section 30 of the gift tax act and
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