Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: delhi and ajmer rent control act 1952 repealed section 46 repeals and savings Court: karnataka Page 1 of about 4 results (0.068 seconds)

Mercury Press Vs. Ameen Shacoor and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2002KAR2304; 2003(3)KarLJ505

..... to the issue. in that case the supreme court considered section 57 relating to repeal in delhi rent control act, 1958. the said section reads as follows:'57(1) the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952, insofar as it is applicable to the union territory of delhi, is hereby repealed.(2) notwithstanding such repeal, all suits and other proceedings under the said ..... to which the new act does not apply shall stand abated. therefore, the observations made by the supreme court with reference to section 57(2) of the delhi act cannot apply to interpret section 70(2) and (3) of the karnataka rent act, 1999.30.3 further, there was a clear conflict between the section 57(2) of the ..... delhi act and the proviso thereto. while section 57(2) of the delhi act required that the pending matters should be decided in accordance with the provisions of the old .....

S.i. KamruddIn Shah (Deceased) by L.Rs. Vs. M.R. Umakanth

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2000KAR2437; 2000(4)KarLJ319

..... court would not have arrived at in hari shankar v rao girdhari lal chowdhury, the supreme court while considering the expression 'according to law' found in section 35 of the delhi and ajmer rent (control) act, observed that it should not be equated to errors of law or of fact simpliciter; it refers to the overall decision, which must be according to law .....

The Hungund Taluka Ranjara Vidyavardhaka Sangha Vs. Rachappa Chanamall ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1998KAR3104

..... reference to a decision of the supreme court in the case of roshan lal mehra v. ishwar dass : [1962]2scr947 . that in that case under the delhi and ajmer merwara rent control act 19 of 1947 a question had arisen whether the appellate order passed by the district judge was revisable and the court held that the revision was maintainable ..... to above makes vast difference particularly as per the perusal of section 11 of the delhi and ajmer merwara rent control act 19/1947. a perusal of section 11 of delhi and ajmer -merwara rent control act 19/1947 reveal that the appeal from the order of the rent controller is to lay to the district judge and not to anybody or the ..... rent control tribunal, section 11 reads thus:'any person aggrieved by an order of the rent controller may, within thirty days from .....

D. Cawasji and Co. Vs. State of Mysore by Its Chief Secretary Bangalor ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1969Kant23; AIR1969Mys23; ILR1968KAR492; (1969)1MysLJ461

..... to raise that contention. the learned special government pleader argued that intoxicating liquors like toddy, arrack and beer, are luxuries and hence arrack shop rent toddy shop rent and beer shop rent can be regarded as taxes on luxuries.79. learned counsel for the petitioners disputed the proposition that alcoholic liquors are luxuries. the petitioner in w ..... doubt, one of the objects of imposing taxes on liquor may be to check consumption. as observed by the supreme court in cooverjee bharucha v excise commr., ajmer : [1954]1scr873 one of the purposes of the regulation of manufacture and trade in liquors is to raise revenue. nevertheless, as pointed out by the supreme ..... the benefit of article 277 of the constitution. as we have already held there is no charge of education cess on arrack shop rent, toddy shop rent, or beer shop rent, tree, tax, or tree rent either under the education act as originally enacted or as amended by the elementary education (amendment) act, 1944. even if education .....

J. Jayalalitha and Others Vs. State, By the Superintendent of Police, ...

Court : Karnataka

..... mp reported in manu/mp/0243/2000; 29. kali ram v/s. state of himachal pradesh reported in air 1973 sc 2773; 30. shambu nath mehra v/s. state of ajmer reported in 1956 scr 199 : air 1956 sc 404 : 1956 crl.lj 794; 31. attygalle and another v/s. the king reported in 44 lw 86; 32. stephen ..... reddy had invested rs. 4,500/-. they opened current a/c. in indian bank at peters road. in 1991 subbirama reddy was elected as an m.p. and stayed at delhi. so, he could not commence the business. in june, 1993 he wanted to change the company to his friends. so, he handed over the companies documents and unused cheques ..... she was the administrative director. selvi jayalalitha was a dormant partner of jaya publications. vinod video vision was owned by tmt. sasikala. that concern deals with equipments of television for rent video covering, editing, advertisement, mixing, and printing of video films. all the income and expenditure accounts relating to this company were handed over by him to nallamma naidu. he .....

M.K. Balakrishnan S/O A. Govindan, Vs. Government of Karnataka Represe ...

Court : Karnataka

..... for the state government to take a decision to lease the tank area in favour of the bangalore turf club for racing and other activities. in the case of delhi water supply and sewarage disposal undertaking v. state of haryana : 1996 (2) scc 572 at paragraph-1, the apex court noting the importance of water as a ..... of the constitution by any person having a power to make such law, ordinance, order, rule or regulation. referring to edward mills co. ltd., beawar v. state of ajmer (s) air 1955 sc 225, the apex court held that there was not any material difference between the expressions 'existing law' and the 'law in force'. the definition ..... , nothing prevented the government from passing the subsequent government order ordering that the petitioner-club shall continue to hold the land on certain conditions such as payment of rent and that it has to make alternate arrangements to shift its activities to any other place. therefore, the government order dated 02.11.1968 produced at annexure-j .....

M.K.Balakrishnan, S/O A.Govindan and ors Vs. the State Government of K ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2010KAR4091

..... be found for thestate government to take a decision to lease the tank area infavour of the bangalore turf club for racing and other activities.in the case of delhi water supply and sewarage disposalundertaking vs. state of haryana - 1996(2) scc 572 atparagraph-1. the apex court noting the importance of water asa precious gift ..... the constitution by any person having a power to make such law, ordinance, order, rule or regulation. referring to edward mills co. ltd., beawar v. state of ajmer (s) am 1955 sc 225. the apex court held that there was not any material diffeience between the expressions 'existing law' and the 'law in force'. the ..... therefore, nothingpreventedthe government from passing the subsequent government order ordering that the petitioner-club shall continue to hold the land on certain conditions such as payment of rent and that it has to make alternate arrangements to shift its activities to any other place.therefore, the government order dated 02.11.1968 produced at annexure- .....