Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian railway companies act 1895 Page 1 of about 77,452 results (0.154 seconds)

Shahdara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway Co. Ltd. Vs. the Municipal B ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1967SC1747; [1967]3SCR243

..... . the next enactment to be referred to is the indian railway companies act, 1895 (act x of 1895), which provided for the payment, by railway companies, registered under the indian companies act, 1882, of interest out of capital during construction. section 2(1) defines 'railway' as meaning a railway as defined in s. 3, clause (4) of the railways act. section 3 provided for a railway company paying interest on its paid-up share capital, out ..... in that section. there are other consequential provisions, in this act. 15. the indian tramways act, 1902 (act iv of 1902) was one to apply the provisions of the indian railway companies act, 1895, to certain tramway companies. the preamble to this act iv of 1902, stated that it was expedient to apply the provisions of the indian railway companies act, 1895, to companies formed for the construction of tramways 'not differing in structure and .....

G.i.P. Railway Company Vs. A.B. Tamboli

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1926)28BOMLR718

..... make his signature one on behalf of the plaintiff, within the meaning of section 72 of the indian railways act. jamshedji's signature was made by him as an agent who had authority to make such a signature. in aldridge v. the great western railway company (1864) 33 l.j.c.p. 161 where a carrier was employed both by the plaintiff ..... for a particular sale, so as to make the goods ' ascertained ' under section 83 of the indian contract act. here there was a definite appropriation of these bales by the plaintiff to the contract, exhibit 68, and that had been assented to by the railway company. according to the ruling of this court in ram-chandra natha v. g.i.p ..... of law, under section 72 of the indian railways act, does not really arise for decision, but, as the case may go further, i think we should give our opinion. it has been laid down by this court, following brabant & go. v. king [1895] a.c. 632, 640, that the obligation of the railway company towards the consignor of goods includes not .....

Kally Dass Mookerjee Vs. the East Indian Railway Company

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1899)ILR26Cal465

..... are concerned. a railway company is not liable for the acts of even its own servants, if those acts are not done in the course and scope of the servants' duty--cobb v. great western railway co. (1894) l.r., app. cas. 419.64. c.a.v.maclean, c.j.,65. this is an appeal by the east indian railway company from a decision of ..... with their duty when they allowed gunpowder to be carried in a compartment where they allowed smoking54. section 47 of the indian railways act, 1890, empowers the company to make rules, and that power is given for the very purpose of meeting cases of this kind; but the defendants have not shown that they took ..... on their part that something dangerous was being carried.40. it was not possible for the company's servants to examine the luggage of every passenger. section 58 of the indian railways act, 1890, provides that every passenger shall, on request, deliver to the railway servants an account in writing containing such a description of the goods he is carrying as may .....

Fazal D. Allana Vs. Mangaldas M. Pakvasa

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1921)23BOMLR1144; 66Ind.Cas.726

..... the seller and the share certificates property in the shares does not pass to the purchaser.35. section 28 of the indian companies act enacts that shares shall be transferable in manner provided by the articles of the company. article 33 of the articles of association of the central india mills provides that shares will be transferred by an ..... out of land and things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth. it is enacted by section 28 of the indian companies act that shares in a company shall be moveable property. share certificates are moveable property and are therefore goods within the meaning of section 108 of (he ..... estopped by the said act of his from asserting any right to the shares. mr,, inverarity for the plaintiff contended that there is no estoppel and has relied on france v. clarka (1884) 26 ch. d. 257. tayler v. great indian peninsula railway co. (1895) 4 g. &. j 559. hutchison v. the colorado united mining company and hamill (1886) .....

Northern Pacific Ry. Co. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

..... of the railroad and railway companies, or of their respective vendees, other than as the lands fall within or without the reservation. if they were within the boundaries of the reservation, they were lands of the indians; otherwise, public lands of the united states, and passed to the companies, respectively, under the act of congress and the ..... railway company, for certain described lands. the foundation of the bill is that the patents were issued by mistake as public lands granted to the railroad company under the act of congress dated july 2, 1864 (13 stat. 365, c. 217), the lands actually being, it is alleged by the government, part of the yakima indian reservation ..... states v. winans, supra. it is contended that the northern pacific railway company and the individual appellants are bona fide purchasers, and, as such, entitled to protection under the act of march 2, 1896 (29 stat. 42, c. 39). section 1 of that act provides that suits brought by the united states to vacate and annul any .....

Maricopa and Phoenix R. Co. Vs. Arizona

Court : US Supreme Court

..... , 1895 156 u.s. 347 appeal from the supreme court of the territory of arizona syllabus when congress grants to a railway company organized under the laws of a territory a right of way over an indian reservation within the territory, and the road is constructed entirely within the territory, that part of it within the reservation is ..... irrespective of the amount involved. after the organization of the territory of arizona, certain land situated within its geographical limits was set apart as an indian reservation, for the use of the pima and maricopa indians. act of february 28, 1859, c. 66, 3, 11 stat. 401. the tract is known as the "gila river reservation." the maricopa ..... of power. its necessary effect was, to the extent of the grant and for the purposes thereof, to withdraw the land from the operation of the prior act of reservation. and the immediate consequence of such withdrawal, so far as it affected the property and rights withdrawn, was to reestablish the full sway and dominion of .....

Gulf, Colorado and Santa Fe Ry. Co. Vs. Shane

Court : US Supreme Court

..... , colorado & santa fe ry. co. v. shane, 157 u.s. 348 (1895) gulf, colorado and santa fe railway company v. shane no. 212 submitted january 29, 1895 decided april 1, 1895 157 u.s. 348 error to the united states court for the indian territory syllabus it being settled that, by the joint resolution of march 3, 1891, 26 stat. 1115, the ..... brought the case here by error. the writ of error was allowed and sealed on june 5, 1891. it is contended that we are without jurisdiction because, by the act creating the circuit courts of appeals, the court of appeals for the eighth circuit has alone jurisdiction of this controversy. it is settled "that, by the joint resolution of ..... sued out, or taken before july 1, 1891, the court has jurisdiction of this case, the writ of error having been allowed and sealed june 5, 1891. under the act of may 2, 1890, c. 182, providing a temporary government for the territory of oklahoma, the provisions of the statutes of arkansas that if either party shall desire a panel .....

Munna Lal Vs. the East Indian Railway Company

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 82Ind.Cas.772

..... is perfectly clear that the points for determination were brought out by the evidence on the record. the first point to be noted is this. the east indian railway company, were the carriers from howrah to agra. the plaintiff took some sort of objection originally in respect to an alleged damage done to the goods when they ..... arises was brought is 1918 in the court of the subordinate judge of agra by the proprietor of a firm carrying on business at agra against the east indian railway company on the following allegations:(1) that the plaintiff had had consigned to him 101 bales of strawboard from howrah to agra city in two waggons one containing ..... sections 227 and 237 of the indian contract act. here the station master clearly had authority to bind the company by his action. the responsibility of the railway company is thus that of a bailee under sections 151, 152 and 161 of the indian contract act. this is clear from the provisions of section 72 of the indian railways act (ix of 1890).8. it .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Satish Kumar and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : 2001ACJ1568; AIR2001MP41

..... . to this extent, the indian statute therefore differs from the english statute. under section 13 of the railways act, 1890 no such duties are imposed directly on the railway administration by the statute. the section on the other hand only confers a power on the central government to issue a requisition to the railway administration i.e. the general managers or the railway companies (if any) to ..... what can be the effect of an omission to exercise this statutory power to issue a requisition, will be dealt with separately under point no. 4). section 13 of the indian railways act may be noticed : '13. fences, screens, gates and bars.--the central government may require that with a time to be specified in the requisition or within such further time as .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : II(1997)ACC589; 1998ACJ342; JT1997(8)SC653; 1997(2)KLT986(SC); (1998)118PLR248; 1997(6)SCALE497; (1997)8SCC683; [1997]Supp4SCR643; 1997(2)LC827(SC)

..... only confers a power on the central government of issue a requisition to the railway administration, i.e. the general managers or the railway companies (if any) to ..... . v. tara prasad) : air1928cal504 , the direct obligation cast on the railway by section 21 of the act 18 of 1954 was repealed later by act 25 of 1871. to this extent, the indian statute therefore differs from the english statute. under section 13 of the railways act, 1890 no such duties are imposed directly on the railway administration by the statute. the section on the other hand .....