Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition (C) No.116 of 2019 Forum for Peoples Collective Efforts (FPCE) & Anr. Petitioners Versus The State of West Bengal & Anr. Respondents 1 JUDGMENT Dr Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud A The challenge B Legislative history C RERA - the legislative process D Salient features RERA E Salient provisions of WB-HIRA F RERA and WB-HIRA provisions at variance G Submissions G.1 For the petitioners G.2 For the Union of India G.3 For the State of West Bengal H Analysis H.1 Entry 24, List II West Bengals housing industry defense H.2 The Constitutional Scheme of Article 254 and repugnancy H.3 Repugnancy RERA and WB-HIRA2H.3.1 Meaning of is in addition to and not in derogation of any other law H.3.2 Meaning of law for the time being in force H.3.3 Knitting it together H.4 Lack of Presidential Assent for WB-HIRA I Conclusion 3 PART A A The challenge 1 The constitutional validity of the West Bengal Housing Industry Regul...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2008(5)ALLMR366; 2009(1)BomCR179
Khanwilkar A.M., J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Counsel for the respondents waive notice for the concerned respondents. As short question is involved, petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith by consent. During the course of hearing the Counsel for the respondent No. 2 submitted that he would fully support the argument of the petitioners and would pray for transposing respondent No. 2 as petitioner.3. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the judgement and order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Greater Mumbai Region, Mumbai dated 23rd July, 2008 below Exhibit-1 in Application No. 17 of 2007. The principal application being No. 17/06 has been filed by respondent No. 1 for initiating action under Section 41-D of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the named trustees including the petitioners. The Joint Charity Commi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2001(5)KarLJ429
ORDERR. Gururajan, J. 1. Petitioner-the Mysore Chest Care and Pain Therapy Centre (Private) Limited, has presented this petition seeking for a direction directingKarnataka State Industrial Investment and Development Corporation (for short the 'Corporation') to forbear from proceeding with the sale of the assets of the petitioner in terms of the notification Annexure-M, dated 25-2-2000. 2. Facts of the case in brief are as under. 3. Petitioner 1 is a Company having its office at Mysore. Petitioner 2-Dr. Raj G. Pal is the Managing Director of the petitioner 1-Company. Petitioner 1 borrowed certain sums of money from the Corporation for purchase of medical laser equipment. Petitioner 2 has also borrowed certain sum in his individual capacity for purchase of certain other medical equipments. Equipments were purchased and put to use by the petitioners. Petitioner states that in spite of request to the Corporation, it did not grant any additional loan for purchase of additional equipments. F...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
Reported in : (2007)73SCL261SAT
1. This appeal filed under Section 15T of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is directed against the order dated May 26, 2006 passed by the whole time member of the of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as the Board) directing amongst others, the appellant not to act as a depository participant pending inquiry and passing of final orders except for acting on the instructions of existing beneficial owners. The appellant as a stock broker has also been directed not to undertake any proprietary trades in securities till the passing of the final order in the inquiry. Facts giving rise to this appeal may first be noticed.2. The issue regarding alleged manipulations in Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) of various companies had been engaging the attention of the Board for some time. It received some information regarding the alleged abuse and misuse of the IPO allotment process. As a part of its ongoing sur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2009(4)BomCR414; 2009(111)BomLR502
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.1. Common question involved in all these Writ Petitions is, .whether State Government can levy and demand any sum as amount of nonagricultural assessment from Petitioners WCL.... Petitioner- Company is incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 with its Head Office at Nagpur and it is Central Government Undertaking in public sector as also the Government Company within the meaning of Section 617 of Companies Act. It is having coal mines in western part of the nation including State of Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. Prayers in all Writ Petitions filed by it are to declare that orders assessing non-agricultural tax and demand notices issued consequentially are illegal. There is also similar prayer in relation to Zilla Parishad cess and Gram Panchayats cess with direction to Respondents to refund the amount already recovered from it on that account.2. In W. P. 1161/2007 challenge is to assessment orders dated 3/3/2005 and 4/3/2005 and consequential demand notices da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1996)135CTR(All)367; [1996]220ITR509(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and as agreed by the parties, the writ petition was finally heard and is disposed of by this order at the admission stage itself.2. The petitioner is a lessee of residential plot No, 133 in Block 'A', Sector 15A, at NOIDA, District Ghaziabad. The lessor is the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority and the area of the plot is about 465 square meters. The petitioner entered into an agreement to sell the aforesaid plot to one Devesh Behari Saxena for a consideration of Rs. 20,21,000, vide agreement to sell dated January 22,1993. In accordance with Section 269UC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), a statement in Form No. 37-I was filed by the petitioner and the prospective buyer. The appropriate authority, vide order dated March 24, 1993, made an order under Section 269UD of the Act for the purchase by the Central Government of the said plot of land. It i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1965Mad142
(1) In the second appeal the question is whether it is necessary, for valid exercise of the power of sale under S. 69 of the Transfer of Property Act, that the first mortgagee, who invokes the power, should give notice of it to the second mortgagee and in the other appeal, C. M. A. No. 80 of 1962, the question is one of limitation. The property in question originally belonged to one Devalla Ramaiah. On his death, his estate vested in the Administrator General for administering the same on behalf of Ramiah's minor sons. On 18-2-1939, the Administrator General sold the property to the father of the respondent in the second appeal. But the purchaser on the same date executed the mortgage to secure a part of the price not paid at the time. The respondent' father was adjudged as insolvent in I. P. No. 46 of 1942 on the file of this court and in the insolvency, the Official Assignee, Madras sold the property to the insolvent's son, the respondent, on 23-5-1955. It appears that the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1998(5)KarLJ283
ORDER1. The petitioner in W.P. No. 7583 of 1998 is serving as an Officer in Scale-II in the respondent-Vijaya Bank. The petitioners in the remaining three writ petitions are the unrecognised trade unions of the Officers of the Bank. Their prayer is to restrain the respondent-Bank from enforcing certain clauses of the Transfer Policy envisaged in its Circular No. 267 of 1991, dated 24-12-1991 as amended by Circulars No. 82 of 1996, dated 10-4-1996 and No. 35 of 1998, dated 12-2-1998 being An-nexures-B, D and E respectively of W.P. No. 7583 of 1998.2. Justifying the rotational transfers of the Officers of the Banks, the Additional Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Finance, Banking Division has stated on affidavit that.-'rotational transfers were found necessary in the Banks to ensure that longer stay of any person at a particular place may not leadto unhealthy relationship with private parties as many frauds in the Banks have reportedly taken place due to such nexus. Su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2005(4)ALD582; 2005(4)ALT327; [2005]126CompCas708(AP); [2005]63SCL339(AP)
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. Heard - Sri E. Manohar, Sri J.V. Suryanarayana, Senior Advocates, Sri D.V. Bhadram, Sri K.V. Satyanarayana, Sri Badri Premnath, Advocates for the several petitioners/appellants; learned Advocate General for the State of Andhra Pradesh; Sri Nooti Ram Mohan Rao, Sri Ashok Anand Kumar, Sri K. Gopala Krishna Murthy, Advocates for the several Co-operative Banks and Sri M. Ratna Reddy, Advocate for the Union of India.2. The several writ petitions were filed at various stages of proceedings before the authorities of the Registration Department of the State. All the writ petitioners had obtained loans or Overdraft facility from the respective Co-operative Banks in sums exceeding Rupees ten lakhs each. In every instance there was a default in the repayment of the instalments or the loan amount and consequently a violation of the terms of the loan agreement. The lending Co-operative Banks had initiated proceedings for recovery of the dues under the provisions of the Andh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1. The constitutional validity of Roerich and Devika Rani Roerich Estate (Acquisition & Transfer) Act, 1996 (in short the Acquisition Act ), the legal validity of Section 110 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (in short Land Reforms Act ), the Notification No. RD 217 LRA 93 dated 8th March, 1994 issued by the State Government thereunder and the scope and content of Article 300A of the Constitution of India, are the issues that have come up for consideration in these civil appeals. 2. We propose to deal with the above issues in three parts. In Part-I, we will deal with the validity of Section 110 of the Land Reforms Act and the validity of the notification dated 8.3.1994 and in Part-II, we will deal with the constitutional validity of the Acquisition Act and in Part-III, we will deal with the claim for enhanced compensation and the scope of Article 300A of the Constitution. PREFACE 3. Dr. Svetoslav Roerich, a Russian born, was an internationally acclaimed painter, artist an...
Tag this Judgment!