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 Sorted by: old Court: karnataka Page 1 of about 306 results (1.081 seconds)Doddamadiah and ors. Vs. Mallappa
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1953Kant6; AIR1953Mys6
registered no oral agreement to rescind it can be proved indian evidence act section 92 proviso 4 these observations may be evidence act 29 mys c c r 332 is an authority for the view that where the original lease is in reached by the learned subordinate judge in the case is therefore correct though we are not in agreement with him with
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRukn-ul-mulk Syed Abdul Wajid and ors. Vs. R. Vishwanathan and ors.
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant33; AIR1950Mys33
had come to be credited into the father vaidyalingam s bank account as per ex g 3 and it is no in the cavalry road bank vide vol ii b p 368 earlier account is found in vol ii p 391 in suits had to be filed as properties were within the jurisdiction of different courts the very words used by the plaintiffs framing considering rule 1 of order 14 of the civil procedure code 1908 i the court adjudged that when the testator therefore a party to the compromise we do not think therefore it is open to the plaintiffs to question in these
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Income-tax, Mysore Vs. Imperial Tobacco Co. of India L ...
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant1; [1956]26CompCas121(Kar)
that nothing in the document is to be construed as constituting a partnership the court held that the relationship was in and sent by its branch in india by investment outside india are profits liable to tax in india by virtue of hence had business connection bombay stamp act 1958 schedule 1 article 36 y r meena cj d a mehta a s potential assessee it is therefore seen that there is preponderant authority for interpreting business as not being confined to what is the price for the goods was also paid there and therefore connection with the business in mysore cannot be imputed to
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM.L. Ramchandrasetty and ors. Vs. M.L. Nagappasetty and ors.
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant23; AIR1950Mys23
the recent decision in venkatagiri ayyangar v hindu religious endowments board makras where sir john beaumont observed that there can be by adverse possession is proved limitation act 36 of 1963 articles 64 65 k ramanna j adverse possession suit property fell can be hardly any objection to this court exercising its powers in favour of persons being impleaded in the case 5 order 1 rule 10 and section 115 of the civil procedure code 1908 adverse possession k ramanna j suit property fell have any interest in the property by birth it was therefore held that the sons were not necessary parties the observation
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAdinaranappa Vs. Mallamma
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant13; AIR1950Mys13
are specifically excluded the commentary in chitaley annaji rao s indian limitation act vol i pages 913 to 916 makes it years is not mentioned in col 2 of the said article 67 you must read that article as though six years complete code the commentary makes it also clear that the amendment of the section into its present form by the limitation held that the test is whether acts is a complete code the commentary makes it also clear that the amendment of application a period of limitation different from the period prescribed therefor by schedule i of the limitation act it need hardly
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTPuttamma Vs. Chikka Hanumiah and ors.
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant18; AIR1950Mys18
73 at p 81 55 mad 352 the practice in indian courts was always to allow the legal representative of a the date of dismissal as the same was barred under article 181 of the act motor vehicles act 59 of 1988 is not exhaustive and section 151 civil p c give power to courts to do what is needful to prevent injustice even if there is no provision of law in civil procedure code to bring legal representatives of deceased persons who are parties the accident that the judgment debtor has died may therefore throw a most serious obstacle in the way persons who
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRukn-ul-mulk Syed Abdul Wajid and ors. Vs. R. Visvanathan and ors.
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant55; AIR1950Mys55
the ground that they had requested the government for the constitution of a special bench the counsel for the respondents also workmen state financial corporations act 1951 63 1951 section 29 power of the corporation under taking over the assets of the not falling within order 47 rule 1 of the civil procedure code 1908 d the case discussed about the effect of to be analogous to the grounds immediately preceding we are therefore of opinion that the grounds urged for the review are
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMartha Samadhanam David Vs. Sudha
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant26; AIR1950Mys26
certain amount of conflict of opinion in the decisions of indian high courts and the matter has therefore to be examined o plaintiff is barred by limitation b liquation act 1963 article 110 suit by a person excluded from a joint family so as regards her civil rights but we find no authority in hindu law for the position that an apostate is barred by limitation k ramanna j a code of civil procedure 1908 section 100 regular second appeal suit for partition and at all and that the offence of bigamy was not therefore committed but later on in r v allan 1872 l
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSubbegowda and ors. Vs. H.L. Keshava Murthy and ors.
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant6; AIR1950Mys6
it is arbitrary and is violative of article 14 of constitution writ court can grant relief that apart borrower also cannot and reprobate which principle is based on doctrine of election indian contract act 9 of 1872 section 10 s r bannurmath of contract by it is arbitrary and is violative of article 14 of constitution writ court can grant relief that apart to appellant inaction on part f corporation being a state authority and unilateral cancellation of contract by it is arbitrary and the plaintiff through whom he claims a portion there can therefore be little or no doubt that on that date she
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTD. Ramachandriah Vs. Government of Mysore
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant10; AIR1950Mys10
earlier cannot create a right in favour of appellants nor constitute an estoppel against revision petitioner from enforcing their rights and not referred to any provision either in the defence of india rules or the motor vehicles act to show that by it no evidence whatever is available no statutory provision or authority to justify a conviction of the registered owner of a his participation in the offence was proved by the prosecution therefore in the absence of any proof the conviction of the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT