Constitution Of India Article 368 Power Of Parliament To Amend The Constitution And Procedure Therefor - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: constitution of india article 368 power of parliament to amend the constitution and procedure therefor Court: gujarat Year: 1964 Page 1 of about 121 results (1.074 seconds)The Firm of Fakirbhai Karsanji and ors. Vs. Gulabbhai Khandubhai Desai ...
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-07-1964
Reported in : AIR1964Guj277
independent darkhast or execution application and not by way of amendment application 3 each of the appellants is an agriculturist and the proviso to order 21 rule 17 4 c p code in the case of a decree for the payment of aplication for executing the appellate court s decree there is therefore no merit in this point 3 regarding the second point
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAmbalal Jivabhai Patel Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ahmedabad
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-27-1964
Reported in : [1964]54ITR308(Guj)
municipal taxes municipal corporation of ahmedabad could be said to constitute information on which the income tax officer could act for section 34 1 b which was the section in the indian income tax act 1922 corresponding to the present section 147 section 147 b are conditions precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction under that sub section but we do not see how which we have already set out above the question which therefore arises for determination is whether this intimation could be said
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJamnadas Chhotalal Desai and ors. Vs. C.L. Nangia and ors.
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jul-31-1964
Reported in : AIR1965Guj215; (1965)0GLR137
to carry on trade or business the challenge to the constitutionality of thee provisions must therefore fail 32 mr sorabji then of excise on all excisable goods produced or manufactured in india at the rates set forth in the first schedule of makes fabricates or brings into existence a product or an article by physical labour or power including a process incidental or not only owning but having actually operated not more than power looms during the three years immediately preceding their having joined as soon as may be after it is made before parliament while it is in session for a period of thirty 1962 the show cause notice dated april 16 1962 was amended by a further notice dated april 23 1962 where under failure by him to deposit the duty it contained no procedure whatsoever and left the executive to evolve such procedure as had manufactured the goods by employing hired labour and was therefore a manufacturer was wrong in law because the agreement between
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRamgopal and Sons Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Surat and anr.
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Nov-27-1964
Reported in : [1965]16STC1005(Guj)
the act or because they are not taxable under the constitution and yet he may unjustly enrich himself by collecting from articles 19 1 226 and 286 1 of constitution of india whether section 12a 4 was beyond legislative competence of state section 12a 4 of bombay sales tax act 1946 and articles 19 1 226 and 286 1 of constitution of india do not think that the ambit of ancillary or incidental power goes to the extent of permitting the legislature to provide nothing short of permitting extortion the legislature therefore intervened and amended the act by introducing section 12a the object obviously was in kantilal babulal brothers v h c patel being special civil application no 641 of 1962 decided on 2nd december 1963 from the petitioners and that a writ of mandamus should therefore issue compelling the respondents to carry out this statutory obligation
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTChimanlal B. Joshi Vs. Nagrashna (M.N.), Second Labour Court, Ahmedaba ...
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Oct-23-1964
Reported in : (1965)ILLJ318Guj
of superintendence or revision or under art 226 of the constitution but really in our judgment that question does not fall industrial disputes act 1947 and article 227 of constitution of india order calling for records of case question arose whether respondent and 33 c 2 of industrial disputes act 1947 and article 227 of constitution of india order calling for records of with limited jurisdiction every court or tribunal had an implied power for determining a jurisdictional fact sri nanavati though as already division bench consisting of bhagwati and divan jj in special civil applications nos 988 of 1960 and 47 and 48 of master and servant between him and respondent 4 and that therefore the real question which respondent 1 was called upon to
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMehta Amritlal Gokaldas and ors. Vs. the State of Bombay and ors.
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-06-1964
Reported in : AIR1965Guj87; (1964)10GLR769
thestate of saurashtra was constituted a b state under the constitution of india under art 214 read with art 238 thereof division court pursuant to section 108 of the government of india act the letters patent themselves make a distinction between an indian limitation act 1963 act of 36 of 1963 that article makes a provision for an appeal from a decree or the high court and the other laws such as the power to enroll advocates practice and procedure of the court the the establishment of the high court under the act of parliament 24 and 25 vict chap 104 section 1 of that as regards all these powers relating to advocates practice and procedure custody of seal and forms of writs and other processes transferred to that state from the existing state of hyderabad therefore so far as the andhra pradesh high court is concerned
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe State of Gujarat Vs. Muniruddin, Shabhuddin
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-05-1964
Reported in : 1966CriLJ210
was a citizen of india at the commencement of the constitution he has not led any evidence to prove that he c who has been ordinarily resident in the territory of india for not less than five years immediately preceding such commencement respondent has failed to prove one of the requirements of article 5 of the constitution namely that the respondent had his that he was not a foreigner the acquittal order is therefore wrong and is set aside the respondent is convicted under
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThakkar Kalyanji and ors. Vs. Thakkar Liladhar Chhanganlal and ors.
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-12-1964
Reported in : AIR1965Guj204; (1965)0GLR44
land is personal property of the ruler of any former indian state or public trust property or property of any class fees have been prescribed on the scale prescribed therein that article would have application if there is no other specific provision auction sale held by the mortgage in exercise of the power of sale conferred by the mortgage was illegal and void capable of being treated as a suit in or any civil court not otherwise provided for and the subject matter of 1 in schedule i also could not be invoked we therefore hold that the correct court fee payable on the memorandum
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBapalal Khushaldas Gosalia Vs. V.R. Prasad and anr.
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Mar-11-1964
Reported in : (1964)10GLR633
be questioned in a petition under art 32 of the constitution and that the proper remedy for correcting an error in therefore clandestinely brings or in popular parlance smuggles gold into india without the permission of the reserve bank of india from warrant issued by a certain competent magistrate as the said articles were believed to be dutiable and or prohibited and therefore thing they further observed that the restriction placed upon the power of the customs officers under sec 178 a cannot be 12 11 f i 48 dated 25 8 48 as amended issued under section 2 1 of the foreign exchange regulation against section 23 of the act provides for penalty and procedure in respect of offences under the act and sec 23 wrongly applied by the adjudicating authority without the conditions precedent therefor having been satisfied as also the validity of the seizure
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJaswantrai Malukchand Vs. Anandilal Babalal
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-07-1964
Reported in : (1965)6GLR325
of the code of civil procedure when no question of jurisdiction was involved and he refers to vora abbasbsai alimahomed v high court under section 115 of the code of civil procedure the decision was reversed as in the opinion of the and complied with the requirements of clause b he was therefore protected the contention of mr ganpatrai that the dispute regarding
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT