Developer - Judgment Search Results

Manmohan Mathur Sudhirchand Mathur Vs. Addl. Area General Manager, Nat ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1966MP126

..... government issued a notification under section 9 1 of the coal bearing areas acquisition and development act 1957 hereinafter called the act acquiring land measuring 145 75 acres described in ..... jurisdiction this court has therefore jurisdiction to entertain this petition notwithstanding that the national coal development corporation is located at karachi or that the seat of the union of india is .....

Kitty Hawk Development Co. Vs. City of Colorado Springs

Court: US Supreme Court

..... city of colorado springs 379 u s 647 1965 u s supreme court kitty hawk development co v city of colorado springs 379 u s 647 1965 379 u s 647 ..... kitty hawk development co v city of colorado springs appeal from the supreme court of colorado no 565 .....

Vinay Construction and Development Company, Hyderabad Vs. Inspector Ge ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1967AP90

..... of cl 5 of the amended lease deed filed by m s vinay construction and development co hyderabad for adjudication under s 31 of the indian stamp act hereinafter called the .....

Chandgi Ram Thakar Dass Vs. Election Tribunal and Assistant Developmen ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: AIR1965P& H433

..... 227 of the constitution of the india and is directed against the order of assistant development commissioner election tribunal constituted under rule 59 of the delhi panchayat raj rules 1959 the .....

Nemchand Gulabchand Vs. Block Development Officer, (Returning Officer) ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1965MP251

dixit c j 1 this is an application under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution for the issue of...

Vr.Kr.S. Firm Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: [1966]60ITR425(SC)

..... of source of power under statute section 57 delhi development authority management and disposal of housing estates regulations 1968 ..... it is not contemplated in law section 57 delhi development authority management disposal of housing estates regulations 1968 regulation ..... b sinha h s bedi jj estoppel housing scheme by development authority allotment letter stipulating norms for fixing price payment .....

Gobald Motor Service (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: [1966]60ITR417(SC)

..... 1 1872 section 115 s b sinha h s bedi jj estoppel housing scheme by development authority allotment letter stipulating norms for fixing price payment schedule of instalments and interest chargeable ..... default of allottee as per terms of allotment letter and restoring his allotment conduct of development authority estop it from raising a plea as regards application of office order this clearly .....

Chamaraja Vs. State of Mysore and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: AIR1967Kant21; AIR1967Mys21; ILR1966KAR170; (1966)1MysLJ119

..... and the same is dismissed no costs 16 petition dismissed integrated child development service programme integrated child development service programme icds d v shylendra kumar j scheme envisaged for ..... providing proper social conditions and atmosphere for the informal development of the personality of the child expansion of anganawadi centres selection of anganawadi .....

Thayyil Mammo and anr. Vs. Kottiath Ramunni and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1966SC337; 1965(0)KLT1196(SC)

..... by public auction held neither sections 6 and 7 nor any other provision of the development act casts any obligation on the central government to provide amenities to plots sold leased ..... providing maintaining or continuing any amenity at chandigarh thus definition of the amenity in the development act does not in any manner cast any obligation on chandigarh administration with reference to .....

Sachidanand Prasad Vs. Babu Sheo Prasad Singh

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1966SC126; 1965(0)BLJR841; [1966]1SCR158

..... at rs 75 per sq feet with all statutory benefits is proper however deduction of development charges at rs 25 per sq feet in absence of evidence of proposed ..... development is not justified onthese facts this court held that the mortgagee clearly gained an advantage .....