Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... when the legislature comes up with proper legislation, i.e. legislation by adoption, legislation by reference or legislation by incorporation or by amending the acts. it is not the job of the court to read the provisions of one act into another by adopting one of these methods since it is for the parliament or the state legislature to undertake this exercise and ..... of the apex court in para 29 of the judgment in the case of j.p. srivastava and sons (p) ltd. and others vs. gwalior sugar co. ltd. and others (2005) 1 scc 172, which are as follows: 29. therefore, although as a rule, trustees must execute the duties of their office jointly, this general principle is subject to the following ..... law laid down by honble supreme court in the case of j.p. srivastava and sons (p) ltd. and others vs. gwalior sugar co. ltd. and ors. reported in (2005) 1 scc 172, held that said question would have to be decided by the learned single judge on the facts and circumstances of the case, having regard to the law .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... on clear ignorance or disregard of the provisions of law. in t.c. basappa v. t. nagappa this court held that such error is an error which is a patent error and not a mere wrong decision. .... thus, if there has been disregard of the provisions of law the same would constitute an error apparent on the face of ..... upon the high court to hear the learned counsel for the parties on such substantial question of law. in corpn.ofcity of bangalore vs. syed iqbal hussain, reported at (2005) 9 scc 362 in paragraph 10 it has been observed thus: 10. it is not in dispute that the high court at the time of admission of the second appeal ..... this second appeal has a checkered history. the appellant-union of india initiated action for eviction under section 5a of the public premises (eviction of unauthorized occupants) act, 1971 (in short, the act ) against respondent no.1 asserting that the respondent no.1 is occupying land belonging to government of india. as soon as the notice was served on the respondent .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... senior counsel, further submits that there has been no violation of any provisions of the act, 1965, much less section 72 of the said act. he submits that the provision of section 72, as it existed in the original act, came to be substituted by the amending act no. 15 of 2012 and the substituted section 72 came into force with effect from 4 ..... seeking any prior technical sanction from an engineer designated or recognized by the state government as per the proviso to section 72, as it stood prior to 2012 amendment. he submits that this act on the part of the petitioners, apart from being violative of section 72, was also violative of clause 18 of the standing order no.36. according to ..... 26. shri khajanchi, learned counsel for the interveners, has also relied upon the case of p.c. agarwala vs. payment of wages inspector, m.p. and ors. (2005) 8 scc 104. however, with due respect, i do not find that this case provides any assistance to the argument made in this regard by him. this case deals .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... ), in para 4 of which the honble supreme court has held that 4. on going through the changes, quoted above, made to s.147 of the act, we find that, prior to direct tax laws (amendment) act, 1987, reopening could be done under above two conditions and fulfillment of the said conditions alone conferred jurisdiction on the ao to make a back assessment ..... the learned counsel for the parties. 2. validity of a notice under section 148 of the income tax act, 1961 served on the petitioner company, whereby reassessment has been ordered is challenged by it in these two writ petitions. notice in writ petition no.2005/2013 relates to reassessment for a.y. 2006 2007 whereas notice in writ petition no. 6606/2013 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... disentitled for the relief of reinstatement with back wages. in this back drop, the challenges as raised would have to be adjudicated. 9. the respondent by amending the dispute sought damages that were equivalent to the salary that he would have earned had he been in service till his superannuation. a chart showing entitlement to ..... junior adhyapak mahavidyalaya and others [ (2013) 10 scc 324]. reliance was also placed on the judgment of the madhya pradesh high court in wit petition no.606/2005 (district central cooperative bank limited vs. shri madanlal s/o bhanwarlal udiya) decided on 22-4-2016. it was, therefore, submitted that no case was made out ..... officer, the bank terminated the services of the respondent on 28-4-2000. the respondent being aggrieved filed a dispute under section 91 of the said act before the cooperative court seeking a declaration that the resolution resulting in termination of his services was illegal. the relief seeking declaration that the respondent continued in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... of section 21, and chapter vii, shall apply to such land as if the land was surrendered by the tenant under section 20 of the principal act. section 8. it amends section 46 of the principal act by inserting a new sub-section (1a) in that section to provide that where a tenant is evicted from land before 1st april, 1961 and ..... tenancy in respect of the land belonging to the trust is not heritable, and the decision of this court in gajanan maharaj sansthan, shegaon v. digambar pandhari bhise, reported in 2005(4) bom.c.r. 376, for the proposition that the exemption certificate operates on the facts, which were in existence prior to the date of issuance of such certificate. ..... of this court in the case of gajanan maharaj sansthan, shegaon v. digambar pandhari bhise, reported in 2005(4) bom.c.r. 376, it is held in paras 9 and 10 as under: 9. perusal of section 129 of the tenancy act reveals that the said section 129 only require agricultural lands which are property of the trust for educational .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... suit property. it is submitted that section 6(5) of the hindu succession act, 1956 (as amended by act of 2005) lays down that the amended section 6 shall not apply to a partition which has been effected before 20th december, 2004. the explanation below sub-section (5) of section ..... .1/plaintiff could not have made any claim for his share in the suit property. it is submitted that section 6(5) of the hindu succession act, 1956 (as amended by act of 2005) and the explanation below it makes it clear that the respondent no.1/original plaintiff is not entitled for the claim as made by him in the ..... the partition effected pursuant to the compromise arrived at in the regular civil suit no.139/1957. the explanation 2 to section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956 (prior to amendment of 2005) debars the original respondent no.1/plaintiff from claiming any share in the suit property as the original respondent no. 1/plaintiff had separated himself from .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... delayed payment from the date when the amount has become so due. the statement of objects and reasons while inserting provisions of section 7q in the said act by amending act no. 33 of 1988 reads as under: 3(vii) the existing penal provisions are made more stringent. a suitable provision is also being made for charging ..... for the petitioners made the following submissions: a] that the initiation of proceedings by the respondent no.1 was belated as the same were initiated in june 2005 in relation to the period from june 1992 to february 2001. it was submitted that though no period of limitation was specified for initiating such proceedings, the ..... as issued was vague and necessary details had not been furnished. subsequently, certain information was forwarded by the respondent no.1 to the petitioners. on 17.11.2005 further submissions were filed on behalf of the petitioners. thereafter on hearing the representative of the petitioners, the respondent no. 1 passed an order holding the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... with the finding of the trial judge that the suit was not maintainable in absence of permission. the learned trial judge was clearly in error in holding that after amendment of section 50 and section 2(10)(e) it is incumbent upon the trustees to obtain prior approval of the charity commissioner to institute suit against a trespasser ..... finding, in accordance with the final decision of the competent authority provided by this act. the amendments in the entries so made subject to any further amendment on occurrence of a change or any cancellation of entries, shall be final and conclusive. (4) whenever an entry is amended or the trust is removed, from the register under sub-section (3), the ..... issue in question. in the case of vinayak dev, idagunji and others vs. shivaram and others; (2005) 6 scc 641, the apex court stated thus in paragraphs 8, 11, 13 and 14. "8. a perusal of section 50 of the act shows that in matters referred to or enumerated in the said section, a suit is to be instituted .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
..... as much as challenge to s.41d has not been pressed and is given up by the petitioners. section 41c of the bombay dales tax act,1959 has been added to the statute book vide state amendment act xix of 1996 and come into force on 8.6.1995. its impact on 1979 sales tax incentive scheme as notified on 5.1.1980 ..... tax, the same is deemed to be extended also to the additional tax and turnover tax as they are based on sales. 24. section 41c has been added by maharashtra amendment act 12 of 1995 wef from 8.6.1995 and it reads:-- -section 41c- cancellation of certificate of entitlement (1) notwithstanding anything contained in this ..... , or (b) not being an unit referred to in entry (a) above, exceeds at any time, whether before or after, the date of commencement of maharashtra tax laws (levy, amendment and validation) act, 1995, the monetary ceiling as provided in the relevant package scheme of incentives. (ii) the period for which a certificate of entitlement was granted to an eligible unit, expires .....
Tag this Judgment!