Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: konkan passenger ships acquisition act 1973 section 14 penalties Year: 1960 Page 1 of about 5 results (0.178 seconds)

A.M.S. Mohammed Kasim Vs. the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, M ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1962Mad85

..... they intended "to bind themselves to any future additions which might be made to that act (l. a. act)". for, new provisions might have been added to the land acquisition act, which would be quite unsuitable to the local code. the judicial committee then expressly observed that, under the circumstances, this was an instance of incorporation of certain provisions ..... offence under section 167(81) of the sea customs act were confirmed.(2) the circumstances under which the petitioner was tried and convicted are these: the petitioner was a passenger bound for ceylon. he came to the customs baggage shed at danushkadipier on 5-2-1958 for embarkation. he made a declaration in ex. p-1 that he had ..... or sending into any port or place in the states of any such articles as aforesaid intended to be taken out of the states without being removed from the ship or conveyance in which it is being carried shall nonetheless be deemed to be a bringing, or as the case may be sending, into the states of that .....

Manka Vs. the State and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1961CriLJ406

..... right to acquire, hold and dispose of property and to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. gold is a commodity which is capable of acquisition. trading in gold is also not prohibited. the aforesaid section makes it well nigh impossible for a citizen to exercise these rights on account of the heavy burden that is ..... . in frailey v. charlton (1920) 1 kb 147 the export of soap had been prohibited by royal proclamation. the respondent, a ship's steward, had on board his ship thirty tablets of soap which was intended for the use of passengers on the voyage. the respondent was not aware of the fact of prohibition. it was held that his ignorance of the prohibition .....

Abdur Rahim Vs. State of Madras (Secretary, Industries, Labour and Co- ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1961)IILLJ213Mad

..... depend upon reasonableness of such requirements and the degree to which the protection of public interest demands. it was held that it was unreasonable to require that conductors of passenger trains should have served two years as conductors of freight train or as brakeman, while the candidates were otherwise competent for the job. it must he noticed that the ..... or conductor, but he had been for several years working as fire man and engineer of both passenger and freight trains. in declaring the statute invalid, lamar, j. observed at p. 1132life, liberty, property, and the equal protection of the law, grouped together in the ..... in smith v. texas 58 l.ed. 1129 the validity of a state legislation, which made it a misdemeanor for a person to act as conductor of a passenger train without having served for two years as a conductor or brake-man in a freight train. the respondent in that case was not so qualified as a brakeman .....

Flora Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Flora v. United States - 362 U.S. 145 (1960) U.S. Supreme Court Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145 (1960) Flora v. United States No. 492, October Term, 1957 Argued May 20, 1958 Decided .June 16, 1958 Rehearing granted June 22, 1959 Reargued November 12, 1959 Decided March 21, 1960 362 U.S. 145 ON REHEARING Syllabus Under 28 U.S.C. 1346(a)(1), a Federal District Court does not have jurisdiction of an action by a taxpayer for refund of a part payment made by him on an assessment for an alleged deficiency in his income tax. The taxpayer must pay the full amount of the assessment before he may challenge its validity in an action under 1346(a)(1). Flora v. United States, 357 U. S. 63 , reaffirmed. Pp. 362 U. S. 146 -177. (a) The language of 1346(a)(1) can more readily be construed to require payment of the full tax before suit than to permit suit for recovery of a part payment. Pp. 362 U. S. 148 -151. (b) The legislative history of 1346(a)(1) is barren of any clu...

Regional Transport Authority and anr. Vs. Sri Kashi Prasad Gupta and o ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1962All551

..... have accepted the principle that a petitioner under article 226 must prove that he has a legal right which has been infringed. in nirmal chakravarti v. land acquisition collector, alipur : air1953cal257 , it was held that it was not open to the beneficiaries under a trust to challenge compensation award after the trust property had ..... for considering representations from persons who have not applied for a permit but are opposed to the grant of a particular permit those include persons already providing passenger transport facilities by any means along or near the proposed route or area, or by any association representing persons interested in the provision of road transport ..... . state of uttar pradesh : [1955]1scr707 any member of the public can, within the limits imposed by state regulations, carry on the business of transporting passengers by motor vehicle. his right to carry on that business is guaranteed under article 19(1)(g), and he is entitled to challenge the constitutionality of any .....