Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: explosives act 1884 section 4 definitions Sorted by: old Year: 1949 Page 9 of about 527 results (0.141 seconds)

Horam and ors. Vs. Rex

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1949All564; 1949CriLJ868

..... come to know of his ejectment may be accepted as correct. that, however, does not mean that the proceedings for ejectment would be rendered invalid.9. under section 181, u. p. tenanoy act, eject, ment proceedings are to be made 'in accordance with the provisions of gode of the civil procedure, 1908. relating to the execution of decrees for ..... he did not know of the ejectment proceedings. the rule referred to by the learned counsel has been framed by the board of revenue with reference to section 181, u. p. tenancy act and is as follows:79. delivery of possession in execution of a decree or order for ejectment shall be made by the qurq amia who, on ..... of possession is to be made to the decree-holder. the board of revenue, however, have framed certain rules under the powers conferred upon them by section 293, u. p. tenancy act, this section runs as follows:the board may, with the previous sanction of the provincial government and after previous publication, make rules consistent with this .....

Ediga Hanumanthappa and anr. Vs. Eeranti Seethayya and Company Consist ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1949)2MLJ217

..... the, others. now, subsequent to this decision which was in 1902, there has been a change in the section corresponding to section 8, of the limitation act of 1877. section 7 of the present act which replaces section 8. of the act of 1877 expressly makes it applicable to the case of an application for the execution of a decree in favour ..... concurrence of the-others, give a valid discharge binding upon all.9. the next case in duraiswami sastriar v. venkatarama iyer : (1911)21mlj1088 arose under section 7 of the limitation act, 1908. sundara aiyar and phillips, jj., held that the managing member of a hindu joint family was competent to give a valid discharge of a decree- ..... to them.8. there is another aspect of the matter adverted to by bhashyam aiyangar, j., which must not be overlooked. according to him, section 8 of the limitation act then in force could not apply to the case of joint decree-holders, because one of several persons entitled jointly to make an application for execution .....

Shivji Bhara and Co. Vs. Kanji Vasanji

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1949Bom337; (1949)51BOMLR515

..... accept the averments made by the plaintiffs in the plaint.5. in my opinion, therefore, this is clearly a suit which does not fall within the purview of section 50 of bombay act lvii of 1947 and, therefore, this court has jurisdiction to try the suit. the order, therefore, made by the learned judge that this suit should be transferred ..... received from the plaintiffs. with regard to defendants nos. 3 to 7, who put in a joint written statement, their contention was that after the tenancy terminated on the explosion having taken place, the plaintiffs were no longer the tenants of the defendants but they were mere licensees, and the defendants required the plaintiffs as a term of the ..... of 13 months during which the tenancy was to continue. according to the plaintiffs it was also agreed that with regard to the tenancy of certain months anterior to the explosion for which the plaintiffs had not paid rent, they should pay a pugree of rs. 60 a month for 5-ir months, which came to rs. 345. according .....

Adiyalath Katheesumma and anr. Vs. Adiyalath Beechu Alias Umma and ors ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1949)2MLJ268

..... . the fourth defendant and his mother filed o.p. no. 50 of 1941 in the court of the additional district munsif, tellicheny, under section 5 sub-section 2 of the madras moppilla marumakkathayam act xvii of 1939 (see exhibit d-14). paragraph 4 of the said petition states that the petitioners are quite prepared to file a suit for ..... 15. this appeal raises an important question of law. the suit was one for partition by 15 out of 20 members of a moppilla marumakkathayam tarwad. section 13 of the madras act xvii of 1939 confers a right on any indi vidual member of a tarwad to claim to take his or her share of the properties of the ..... the parties being mopplas governed by the marumakkattayam law and the right to claim partition is governed by the mappilla marumakkattayam act, 1938 (madras act xvii of 1939). with reference to the division of tarwad house, section 16 of that act provides:in a partition of tarwad properties, unless two-thirds of the members of the tarwad desire to the contrary, .....

Pingle Venkat Rama Reddy Vs. Padampat Singhania

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1950Bom76

..... he wanted to be registered as a receiver in respect of these shares to which the defendant reddy was entitled, very serious difficulties came in his way, because under section 33, companies act, the company was not bound to take notice of any trust, express, implied or constructive, and if the company registered b. k. desai, receiver, as a ..... more than one application, we refuse to countenance the suggestion that the company could by any letter of its restrict the statutory right given to the share-holders under section 105c to apply for all the shares allowed to him till the time limit stated in the notice had expired. therefore, in my opinion, reddy had the ..... there is a new issue of shares is to be determined by a true interpretation of section 105-c, companies act. this is a new section which has been introduced into our act, and there is no parallel to be found in the english companies act. section 105-c makes it incumbent upon the directors when they decide upon increasing the capital .....

Pingle Venkat Rama Reddy Vs. Sir Padampat Singhania

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1949)51BOMLR529

..... to be registered as a receiver in respect of these shares to which the defendant reddy was entitled, very serious difficulties came in his way, because under section 33 of the indian companies act, the company was not bound to take notice of any trust, express, implied or constructive, and if the company registered b.k. desai, receiver, as ..... in more than one application, we refuse to countenance the suggestion that the company could by any letter of its restrict the statutory right given to the shareholders under section 105c to apply for all the shares allowed to him till the time limit stated in the notice had expired. therefore, in my opinion, reddy had the ..... a new issue of shares is to be determined by a true interpretation of section 105-c of the indian companies act. this is a new section which has been introduced into our act, and there is no parallel to be found in the english companies act. section 105-c makes it incumbent upon the directors when they decide upon increasing the .....

New York Vs. Saper

Court : US Supreme Court

..... silentio, united states v. childs, 266 u. s. 304 , 266 u. s. 307 (1924), 5 a.b.r.(n.s.) 5). although, under the chandler act, a tax debt is required to be proved (sec. 57n) and its order of priority ranks below all administration costs and expenses, wages and costs and expenses of creditors successfully opposing a settlement or discharge ..... , 145 f.2d 447, 449, and in united states v. roth, 164 f.2d 575, 577, 578. [ footnote 17 ] "11. section 11(a) of the bill is intended both to clarify and modify section 57j of the act. the change in 57j(c) is to make clear that the limitation on interest 'up to the date of bankruptcy' relates only to ..... sub silentio, by this court in united states v. childs, 266 u. s. 304 , and adopted by congressional reenactment of that section in the chandler act. they page 336 u. s. 333 also contend that, even after the chandler act, the lower courts, and this court in meilink v. unemployment reserves commission, 314 u. s. 564 , affirmed the alleged prior interpretation .....

Algoma Plywood Vs. WisconsIn Board

Court : US Supreme Court

..... "prohibit," agreements requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment. but if there could be any doubt that the language of the section means that the act shall not be construed to authorize any "application" of a union security contract, such as discharging an employee, which under the circumstances "is prohibited" ..... s. 308 is absolutely false. the reason for the insertion of the proviso is as follows: according to some interpretations, the provision of section 7(a) of the national industrial recovery act, 48 stat. 198, assuring the freedom of employees 'to organize and bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing,' was deemed to ..... closed shop agreements between employers and workers." 79 cong.rec. 7570. the senator went on to explain the purpose of the section as dispelling misunderstanding of 7(a) of the national industrial recovery act, 48 stat. 198, denied page 336 u. s. 310 either advocacy or disapproval of the closed shop, then added: .....

Ran Bejai Bahadur and ors. Vs. Ram AdhIn and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1951All550

..... are, however, distinguishable because in both of them the claim had been entertained and decided.17. accordingly, i hold that in law no claim under section 11, encumbered estates act, was preferred or decided by the special judge. consequently, the appellants were not entitled to apply for the quashing of proceedings and the view taken ..... has contended that the question whether the claim was collusive or belated was wholly beyond the scope of the inquiry and that a claim under section 11, encumbered estates act, having been preferred and disposed of by the special judge, a fresh right accrued in favour of the landlords-applicants to get the proceedings ..... closed for the long vacation.4. then, on 3-7-1946, when the courts reopened after the vacation the landlords-applicants made another application, under section 20 of the act, praying for quashing of proceedings. the proceedings relating to liquidation of debts were pending at the time. the application was rejected by the special judge and .....

Dhapal Singh Vs. Gopi Chand and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1949All471

..... that the vendee can easily defeat the right of an intending co-sharer to claim substitution by preemption simply by inducing his vendor to postpone his seeking permission under section 24 of act xiv [14] of 1940 for over a year from the date of the transfer. in other words, the co-sharer, without any fault of his own, would be exposed ..... pre-emption suit, no permission under section 24 of this act has been granted, the court would be necessarily giving a decree for pre-emption in respect of a transaction which, in the eye of law, has not yet ..... there is no effective alienation in the sense that absolute title has passed on to the transferee from the transferor, and that must be the necessary effect of section 24 of this local act, it was still imperative for the pre-emptor to have brought a suit for pre-emption. in cases in which upto the date of the decree in the .....