Constitution Of India Article 368 Power Of Parliament To Amend The Constitution And Procedure Therefor - Judgment Search Results

Stassen for President Citizens Committee Vs. Jordan

Court : US Supreme Court

2 and 4 of article i and elsewhere in the constitution was one of the great purposes of our constitutional scheme the restrictions to be found in 2 and 4 of article i and elsewhere in the constitution was one of the s 461 468 812 gray v sanders 372 u s 368 380 808 the chief justice mr justice douglas and mr of a wrongful act he has done all in his power to qualify as a voter but his vote is not applies to primary elections for senators pursuant to the seventeenth amendment terry v adams 345 u s 461 468 812 gray page 377 u s 914 928 of the constitution a procedure that congress has regulated in detail see 3 u s

Shenandoah Valley Broadcasting Inc. Vs. A.S.C.A.P.

Court : US Supreme Court

be able to do directly in the exercise of our powers of appellate supervision compare bartone v united states 375 u the per curiam opinion announced on october 21 1963 is amended to read the petition is therefore granted and the judgment in which as a result of uncertainties in federal appellate procedures and without unreasonable action by petitioners it is conceivable under their appeal to the court of appeals was timely and therefore that this court properly remanded the case for consideration on

Spencer Vs. California

Court : US Supreme Court

of insanity is consonant with this central aim of our constitution accordingly i respectfully dissent from the denial of the petition during the guilt phase of the trial which under california procedure is separate from the punishment phase the state called one used against the defendant at his trial an indigent defendant therefore is often in effect compelled to choose between foregoing an

Durga Prasad and Another Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward, Muzaffarnagar ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [1965]57ITR583(All)

authority acting without jurisdiction from continuing such action when the constitution confers on the high courts the power to give relief the notice issued under section 34 1 a of the indian income tax act 1922 hereinafter referred to as the act s c manchanda j this is a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution directed against the notice issued under action when the constitution confers on the high courts the power to give relief it becomes the duty of the courts case to consider the correctness of that decision the position therefore is that so far as this court in concerned the

Sha Manumal Misrimal Vs. Natha Rukmani Ammal

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1964)1MLJ312

of the law laid down by article 14 of the constitution following the principles laid down in baburao santaram more v and rent control act in the various states of the indian union in raman das v state of uttar pradesh air1952all703 month were un constitutional on the ground that they offended article 14 of the constitution ganapatia pillai j in the course infinite variety of human relations must of necessity have the power of making special laws to attain particular objects and for constitution originally the madras city tenants protection act 1921 was amended by madras act xix of 1955 in exercise of the only by substantive law but also by a law or procedure the two classes of tenants are not by force of reason for the classification adopted by the legislature and i therefore reject mr rajah iyer s argument that the classification which

Pearey and anr. Vs. Pachchoo

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1964All249

be laid before the hon ble the chief justice for constituting a larger bench to decide this appeal which involves only civil customs and usages section 9 of code of civil procedure 1908 appellants imposing rights of scavenging in a particular area create any difference the suit of respondent no 1 must therefore fail as the origin or long and uninterrupted usage to

Shri Mahadeoji Idol at Bandhaiyapura and anr. Vs. Dasai S/O MatadIn an ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1964MP207

as the one filed by the appellants can fall tinder article 1 of the second schedule to the tenancy act 11 years 1955 to 1958 the suit was dismissed by the civil judge class ii jabalpur who tried it on the said dasai s remaining in possession of the fields there can therefore be no doubt that dasai s possession became wrongful and

ishaq Abdul Karim and anr. Vs. Madan Lal

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1965All34

m borde r m savant jj jurisdiction of school tribunal constituted under maharashtra employees of private schools conditions of service regulations powers of such an agent therefore section 106 of the indian evidence act would apply and place the burden of proving pleads that the authority of an agent armed with the power to take delivery of goods elsewhere and to sell them not required to enter into the area of secondary education therefore school run by the cantonment board is a primary school

Baij Nath Singh Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh Through the Secretary, ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1965All151

the government of india what article 16 1 of the constitution guarantees is equality of opportunity to all citizens in respect of india or under the control of the government of india what article 16 1 of the constitution guarantees is equality or under the control of the government of india what article 16 1 of the constitution guarantees is equality of opportunity very wide in its scope it confers a very wide power on the high court to issue directions and writs of as fulfil the following conditions para 143 of the education code of uttar pradesh provides rules regarding the appointment of teachers picked out sri ishwar saran for preferential treatment and must therefore be held to be discriminatory as far as the petitioner

Pratap Chand Purshottam Das Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1964All284

trade or business guaranteed by article 19 g of the constitution of india vide tata iron and steel co dealing with schedule vii list ii item no 48 of government of india act 1935 sale petitioner in the business of exchange of man affects his fundamental rights to hold property guaranteed by article 19 f as well as his fundamental right to carry of the government of india act 1935 was invested with power to legislate in respect of taxes on sale of goods the government of india act 1935 was enacted by the parliament of england it was the work of english draftsman it stage of arguments is not open to him it is therefore unnecessary and irrelevant in the present case to enter into