Section 252 - Judgment Search Results

Queen-empbess Vs. Dolegobind Dass

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (1901)ILR28Cal211

..... serious import a provision which in certain cases would render section 252 of the code almost nugatory in the absence of any ..... magistrate of co ordinate jurisdiction can hear the complaint under section 252 neither necessity nor convenience warrants such a conclusion there is ..... that the magistrate is bound to hear the case under section 252 unless the code precludes him from so doing until the .....

BaldwIn Vs. Maryland

Court: US Supreme Court

1893 and 1894 johnson co v wharton 152 u s 252 last chance mining co v tyler mining co 157 u

Southern Railway Co. Vs. Carnegie Steel Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... the several companies secured by separate mortgages or deeds of trust covering different sections of the controlled roads or their equipment capable of separate default or ..... case is fosdick v schall 99 u s 235 99 u s 252 253 which related to a claim against a railroad company for rent ..... said in fosdick v schall 99 u s 235 99 u s 252 the income of a railroad company out of which the mortgagee is .....

United States Vs. Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations

Court: US Supreme Court

..... attention to the above paragraph and among other things said if this section had been submitted to me as a separate measure especially during ..... and future state of oklahoma and in case either of said sections or parts thereof is lost to said territory by reason of ..... and successors renounces all claim to the said territories forever 8 stat 252 254 256 we here remark that the words in this treaty .....

The Albert Dumois

Court: US Supreme Court

..... 28 stat 672 c 102 congress enacted that the original provisions of sections 4233 4412 and 4413 of the revised statutes and regulations of ..... the united states except such as are otherwise provided for by section two all laws inconsistent with these rules were repealed except as ..... put her wheel hard a port struck page 177 u s 252 the dumois upon her starboard bow and was herself almost immediately .....

Rider Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

..... lands and buildings authorized to be acquired and constructed by said sections and imposing penalties for injuries to said work which shall extend ..... it reasonably free easy and unobstructed and that by the fifth section of the same act it was made a misdemeanor for any ..... secretary first giving the parties reasonable opportunities page 178 u s 252 to be heard to give notice to the persons or corporations .....

United States Vs. Harris

Court: US Supreme Court

..... hours except upon contingencies hereinbefore stated sec 4387 animals so unloaded shall be properly fed and watered during ..... are received shall be included it being the intent of this section to prohibit their continuous confinement beyond the period of twenty eight ..... of the provisions of the act of march 3 1873 c 252 17 stat 584 entitled an act to prevent cruelty to animals .....

Stearns Vs. Minnesota

Court: US Supreme Court

..... and operated by said company within the limits of this state sec 2 that said northern pacific railroad company shall have the right ..... concerned that constitutional amendment did away with the restrictive features of sections 1 and 3 of article ix in the state constitution and ..... and may determine in what way that page 179 u s 252 trust may be most successfully carried out the mere fact that .....

United States Vs. Tennessee and Coosa R. Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... respondent the coosa railroad was one every alternate odd numbered section for six sections in width on each side of the road with ..... quantity thereby granted not to exceed one hundred and twenty sections for each of said roads having twenty continuous miles completed ..... government it may be after judicial investigation page 176 u s 252 or by taking possession directly under the authority of the .....

Manikapalli Ramayya Vs. Chinna Rangayya and anr.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1900)10MLJ234

by hanumanthappa was a fraudulent transaction within the meaning of section 53 of the transfer of property act it was genuine