Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: kannada development authority act 1994 section 3 constitution of the authority Page 6 of about 13,477 results (0.604 seconds)

Balwantbhai Maganlal Chauhan Vs. Municipal Corporation of the City of ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2001)3GLR1963

..... no. 172 of village majura, ta: choryasi, dist: surat admesuring 44010 sq. mirs. the surat urban development authority reserved the aforesaid land under section 12(2)(b) of the gujarat town planning and urban development act, 1976. (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). it is alleged that in the year 1967, the land was reserved for a slaughter house for a ..... agreement within a period of 10 years from the date of coming into force of final development plan. the petitioner therefore, served a notice to the government on 7th june, 1997 requiring the authority to acquire the land under section 20 of the act and if within six months from the date of the service of such notice, the ..... service of six months notice under section 20(2) of the act. the conclusion of this court is that on interpretation of secs. 20 and 21 of the act is that mere issuance of a draft revised final development plan under section 21 of the act by the authority, shall not take away the right already accrued and vested in .....

Present: Mr.S.C.Sibal Sr.Advocate with Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... care of the religious place and for giving facilities to the tourists, the haryana government had created kurukshetra development board. kurukshetra development board is defined as local authority under p.p.act and the land is defined as public premises, therefore, the applicant has the right to file this case. respondents have not produced ..... order dated 08.08.1994, and, therefore, preferred an appeal before the commissioner, ambala division, ambala (for short 'the appellate authority) under section 9 of the act. however, the appellate authority found the appeal to lack substance, did not find any fault kumar sudhir s 2013.09.05 10:47 i attest to the ..... haryana for respondents no.1 to 3. none for respondents no.4 and 5. mahavir s.chauhan, j. kurukshetra development board, a society (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner') registered under the societies registration, act, 1860 has brought this writ petition under articles 226 & 227 of the constitution of india, to seek issuance of .....

Airport Retail Pvt. Limited Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... the aai. it was submitted that the aai had certain obligations under section 12 of the airports authority of india act, 1994 (hereinafter referred as the aai act ) and it was obliged to provide facilities for passengers and provide for growth and development of the airport. the aai was also empowered to lease the premises of the airport. it ..... within the meaning of airport services under clause (zzm) of section 65(105) of the act.6. briefly stated, the relevant facts are that dial and the airport authority of india (hereinafter referred as the aai ) entered into an operation, management and development agreement (hereinafter referred as the omda ) dated 04.04.2006 whereby dial, a special ..... service tax was payable by dial on the licence granted to the petitioner under section 65(105)(zzm) of the act. it was contended that the demand-cum-show cause notices issued by the respondent authorities to dial were thus liable to be set aside to the extent that service tax was sought to be levied in .....

Dr. J.R.D. Ahuja (Died) and ors. Vs. Advisor to the Administrator, Uni ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1998)120PLR453

..... issued, quashing annexure p/4 and the proceedings held and actions taken thereunder with further declaration striking down and quashing section 8-a of the capital of punjab (development and regulation) act, 1952 and rule 9 of the chandigarh (sale of sites and buildings) rules, 1960 as unconstitutional being violative of articles 14, 19(l)(g) and 21 ..... rejected as pre-mature. the petitioners are free to file their reply and challenge the adverse order, if any, passed by the competent authority by filing appeal/revision under section 10 of 1952 act and in our opinion there is no extra ordinary reason for entertaining the writ petition against the show cause notice issued by the assistant ..... shall also be free to file their reply and produce evidence to show that the premises in question are not being misused by them. if the competent authority passes any order adversely affecting the rights of the petitioners, they shall be free to avail appropriate remedy available to them under the statute.

Abdul Kabeer Vs. Malappuram Municipality

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2012(3)KLT106

..... out a uniform legislation on town and country planning for wider and effective preparations of spatial development plans. regional development plans, district development plans, urban development plans etc. finding that the provisions of the town planning acts and s.51(4) of the municipality act cannot survive together and became really unworkable, it was held that the municipality can have ..... for that reason it cannot be termed as an arbitrary and unreasonable restriction. private interest in such cases stands subordinated to public good. power to plan development of cities and to regulate building activity therein was upheld as a power vested on the state and it cannot be said as an infraction to the ..... the dictum. a division bench of this court in padmini v. state of kerala (1999 (3) klt 465) observed that the municipality has no authority to reject application for building permit on the ground that the land is proposed to be acquired. referring to section 393 of the kerala municipality .....

Brooke Bond India Ltd. Vs. V.S. Narayana and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2005(1)ALD649

..... the court took note of the fact that though registered as a co-operative society, it was constituted under the provisions of the u.p. co-operative land development bank act, 1964. the managing director and the chief general manager of the bank are officials of the sate, who are at the helm of the affairs of the ..... contending that the writ petition is not maintainable. the learned single judge has, however, relying on the decision of the supreme court in u.p. state co-operative land development bank limited v. chandra bhan dubey, , held that a writ petition is maintainable. for coming to this conclusion, the following observation in chandra bhanu dubey (supra), ..... reiterated and clarified in federal bank limited v. sagar thomas (supra), the brooke bond india limited is not a state or instrumentality of the state or other authority within the meaning of article 12 of constitution of india. no reliefs could be granted to the writ petitioners under article 226 of the constitution of india. for .....

G. Sivalingam Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Secretary to Govt. H ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2003)2MLJ701

..... and commercial neighbourhood scheme on both sides of the inner ring road to ensure and to regulate orderly development by madras metropolitan development authority under their project known as a1 land assembly and development project along inner ring road, over an extent of 5.81.0 hectares in manjambakkam village, saidapet ..... under their project known as a1 land assembly and development ..... development department dated 28.6.1995 issued under section 6 of the act, the petitioners' lands were acquired for a public purpose i.e., to wit for development of residential and commercial neighbourhood scheme on both sides of the inner ring road to ensure and to regulate orderly development by madras metropolitan development authority .....

L.Vinayagam and ors. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1995)1MLJ509

..... . lakshmi devi : air1963sc1077 ). in other words, the fact that actual development is permissible in an area other than a development area with the approval or sanction of the local authority did not preclude the central government from acquiring the land for planned development under the act. section 12 is concerned only with the planned development. it has nothing to do with acquisition of property; acquisition generally ..... precedes development. for planned development in an area other than a development area, it is only necessary to obtain the sanction or .....

Consumer Online Foundation. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... of west bengal v. kesor am industries ltd. & ors. [(2004) 10 scc 201]. section 22a of the 1994 act was, therefore, enacted by the amendment act of 2003 to specifically empower the development authority to impose levy and collect development fees which is to be used for the specific purposes indicated in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of ..... section 22a of the 1994 act and this power cannot be usurped by the lessee of the airport by treating it ..... from, the embarking passengers at an airport other than the major airports referred to in clause (h) of section 2 of the airports economic regulatory authority of india act, 2008 the development fees at the rate as may be prescribed;(ii) levy on, and collect from, the embarking passengers at major airports referred to in clause (h .....

Indian Engineering Institution Vs. the President, the District Consume ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1994Kant329

..... distinction between jurisdiction and merits'. this point is decided in favour of the petitioners.'secondly reliance is placed on the decision in the case of the calcutta metropolitan development authority union of india, : air1993cal4 , wherein it is held that under article 226 of the constitution, the high court can issue writ of certiorari when it is ..... that the question of delay may crop up, in fact in order to meet such an eventuality under proviso (3) to section 15 of the act, the appellate authority has the discretion to condone delay. the paramount duty of a court is to do substantial justice and not to prevent a party at its there ..... and against the principles of natural justice;(b) the order impunged is without jurisdiction as the petitioner-institution cannot be brought within the purview of consumer protection act, 1986 (act no. 58 of 1986) since it is imparting education and not rendering any other service which could be brought within the definition of 'consumer' and 'buyer .....