Rex V Davison - Judgment Search Results

Venkatrao Rajerao Mudvedkar Vs. Emperor

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 66Ind.Cas.821

referring judgment of Macleod, C. J., has been severely criticised on the ground that it is based on Rex v. Davison (1) whish deals with the more extensive jurisdiction as to contempt of superior Courts of Record. But that

Ex Parte Terry

Court: US Supreme Court

officers of the court, and immediately order them into custody." "It is utterly impossible," said Abbott, C.J., in Rex v. Davison, 4 Barn. & Ald. 329, 333, "that the law of the land can be properly administered if those

Saklat Vs. Bella

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR161

other members in statu pupillari. But 'commoners,' so called, though their legal position is merely that of boarders (Rex v. Grundon, Ex parte Davison (1775) C. R 315 have been for several centuries admitted equally with the privileged

Shri Wasudeoraoji Sheorey Vs. Shri A.D. Mani, Managing Editor hitavada

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1951CriLJ452

calculated, to prejudice a trial which is pending.This dictum was quoted with approval by Hewart L. C.J. in Rex v. Editor of the Daily Mail (1928) 44. L. R. 303; and so also were his 'additional observations:.there should … gone before me, that the doctrine is to be taken with much limitation.15. Next, I would refer to Davison v. Duncan (1857) 26L.J. Q.B. 104 : 5 W. R. 253 where Lord Campbell C.J. observed at p.

Legal Remembrancer Vs. Matilal Ghose and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (1914)ILR41Cal173

Surendra Nath Banerjee v. Chief Justice and Judges of the High Court (1883) I.L.R. 10 Calc. 109 and Rex v. Davies [1906] 1 K.B. 32.19. To determine the High Court's jurisdiction in this matter involves an enquiry into … Tit. Courts: R. v. Clement (1821) 4 Barn. & Ald. 218; 23 R.R. 260; 25 R.R. 710 R. v. Davison (1821) 4 Barn. & Ald. 329; 23 R.R. 295 R. v. James (1822) 5 Barn. & Ald. 894;

Adi Pherozshah Gandhi Vs. H.M. Seervai, Advocate General of Maharashtr ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1971SC385; (1970)2SCC484; [1971]1SCR863

not to have done wrong It is difficult to see that the section meant anything of that kind."In Rex v. London Quarter Sessions Ex parte Westminster Cor- poration(4) a borough council whose cancellation of the registration of a … the Legislature should have used the expression any person including the Advocate-General aggrieved by an order.(1) 14 Chancery Davison 458.(3) 25 Q. B. D. 357.(5) [1959] I. Q. D. 384.(2) 19 Q. B. 174.(4) [1951] 2 K.

Kokan Unnati Mitra Mandal and ors Vs. Bennet Colemna and Co. Ltd. and ...

Court: Mumbai

community from the publicity given to the proceedings of the Court of justice. Importing from the decision in Rex Vs. Wright 8 T.R., at page 298, it was considered that by such publication the people obtain a … such proceedings. Similarly taking from Lord Justice Campbell in the case of Davison Vs. Duncan it was observed that the balance of public benefit from … prove that the Yes clarification published in "The Times of India" issue dated 8th April 1982 adequately published views of the Plaintiffs and whether the said Article read with above referred clarification amounts to balanced reporting of

A. St. Arunachalam Pillai, Proprietor, Vinayagar Transport Vs. Souther ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1958)1MLJ1

the hands of this Court (Vide Halsbury's Laws of England, Volume II, 3rd edition, page 140, paragraph 265; Rex v. Tabrum : Ex parte Dash (1907) 97 L.T. 551; O.A.O.K. Lakshmanan Chettiar v. Corporation of Madras : (1926)51MLJ742

Bacha Babu and ors. Vs. Emperor

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1935All162

rule of English practice were given in the judgment of the Court in the well known case of Rex v. Baskerville (1916) 2 K.B. 658 and these reasons apply in our judgment with equal, if not greater, force

State of Punjab Vs. Sukhpal Singh

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1990SC231; 1990CriLJ584; JT1989(4)SC95; 1989(2)SCALE731; (1990)1SCC35; [1989]Supp1SCR420

which might prejudice any of the situations set forth in the Section To apply what was said in Rex v. Halliday, Ex parte Zadig, 1917 AC 260 one of the most obvious means of taking precautions against dangers