The Punjab Requisitioning And Acquisition Of Movable Property Act 1978 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: the punjab requisitioning and acquisition of movable property act 1978 Page 1 of about 147 results (0.068 seconds)Om Parkash Vs. Municipality, Bhatinda and anr.
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Reported in: AIR1980P&H254
of this Court in Shri Goverdhan Dass v. State of Punjab, (1975) 77 Pun LR 175 if two different schemes concerning rot be deemed to provide for the compulsory acquisition or requisitioning of property, notwithstanding that it deprives any person of his v. Subodh Gopal, AIR 1954 SC 92 to that word acquisition appearing in Art. 31(2) in the light of the other case, the provisions of Section 2 of the East Punjab Movable Property (Requisitioning) Act were held to be violative of Article. include every vacant space, notwithstanding that it may be private property and partly or wholly obstructed by any gate, post chain the non-compliance of the provisions of S. 192(1)(c) of the Act. We accordingly direct that the petitioners. shall file objections before 1757, 2973, 2974; 2983, 3013; 3916, 4203, 4624, 5176 of 1978; 106, 226, 621; 2358 and 2046 of 1979, are being
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNawn Estates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Reported in: (1982)26CTR(Cal)29,[1982]137ITR557(Cal)
property is the distinguishing feature between requisition and acquisition. The Punjab High Court at Chandigarh observed in the case of CIT for deprivation of user on account of the act of requisitioning, the compensation being for loss of profits would become a Rs. 91,062 during the previous year from the First Land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta, being the compensation for the occupation of its circumstances under which the Government by requisition may take property, movable or immovable. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 75A provides that whenever case of CIT v. Sham Lal Narula , that the property of a citizen might be taken over either by the the time being. If the compensation was paid for an act of acquisition such sum would be in the nature of
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTFood Corporation of India Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Reported in: [1988]69STC374(All)
has also referred to another Division Bench case of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 1573 III of the Seventh Schedule which provides for acquisition and requisition of property. It has thus been submitted that the sale follows :We would, however, like to clarify that though compulsory acquisition of property would exclude the element of mutual assent which such and the property in them does not pass as movables. Though practically the purchaser in a hire-purchase agreement gets the of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act to show that the property vests in the State free from all encumbrances; meaning thereby of Sub-section (1) of Section 3-D of the Sales Tax Act, the liability of tax is fastened upon the first purchaser. the consensus. In Vishnu Agencies v. Commercial Tai Officer AIR 1978 SC 449, six of the seven Judges concurred in overruling
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSmt. Lalita Pathania and ors. Vs. Randip Singh Pathania and ors.
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Reported in: (2009)155PLR680
vide 'J' Notice No. 101/SLAC dated 9.3.1970, published in the Punjab Government Gazette dated 13.3.1970, measuring 18 kanals 4 marlas bearing (since deceased) filed a petition under Section 8 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (for short, 'the the landholder, the compensation becomes payable from the date of acquisition. When a property is requisitioned, the land-owner is compensated for had given minutest details in the Will about his entire movable and immovable properties and has also mentioned that the land of India on 21.3.1972. It is contended that since the property was already acquired during the life time of Amin Chand when the Punjab and Haryana High Court declared the said Act ultravires Articles 14 of the Constitution of India.In the peculiar
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTP.S. Gill and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 16(1979)DLT266; ILR1979Delhi601; 1979RLR497
Municipal Acts like the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act and the Punjab Municipal Act. They naturally provide wide powers to these local the nature of development for which the area was being requisitioned.Referring to the decision in Arnold Bodricks' case Air 1966 S.C. the land under the provisions of the 1894 Act. Such acquisition can certainly be made to enable the D.D.A. not only : a register is to be maintained of all property, movable and immovable vesting in and belonging to the Board (rule the Board may purchase or take on lease any immovable property (other than property vested in the Government) that may be development of the site would be contrary to the 1903 Act was not taken up in the writ petition. Nevertheless the appreciated that the affidavit of, Daryao Singh is made in 1978 and is based on a reading of the record coupled
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAshok Kumar and anr. Vs. Kishan Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: ILR1983Delhi250
by the High Courts of Bombay, Andhra Pradesh, Patna, Mysore, Punjab, Calcutta and Kerala, to the effect that the widow's claim did it get enlarged into an absolute estate on the requisite condi tions being satisfied as contemplated by sub-section (1) of that subsection (2) should be applicable only to cases where acquisition of property is made by a Hindu female for the it, which specifically included in the expression ' property', both movable and immovable property, ac-quired by a female Hindu by inheritance had no power of disposal over the properties, except one property, and provision in respect of that property contains, a specific 1916 and the Hindu Transfers and Bequest (City of Madras) Act. 1921, as a result of which no bequest is invalid Allahabad High Court in the case of Smt. Ram Devi, 1978 All Law Rep 715, on which reliance was placed is
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTK. Veeraswami Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Reported in: JT1991(3)SC198; (1992)IILLJ53bSC; 1991(2)SCALE150; (1991)3SCC655; [1991]3SCR189a
1961CriLJ730 , and (iii) Sajjan Singh v. The State of Punjab : 1964CriLJ310 .68. In 1962, as earlier explained, Santhanam Committee previous sanction of the competent authority empowered to grant the requisite sanction.... Section 6 creates a bar to the court from changes recommended in the existing Rule 15 relating to the acquisition and disposal of property by Government servants. On the one books, etc. But it is essential that the value of movable property should be stated in the statement of assets and the public servant cannot satisfactorily account, of pecuniary resources or property disproportionate to his known sources of income.(2) Any public servant (e) of Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the said Act if he has in his possession pecuniary resources or property 482 of the CrPC, 1973 (Criminal M.P. No. 265 of 1978) to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 46 of 1977
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTManubhai A. Sheth and Others Vs. N.D. Nirgudkar, 2nd Income-tax Office ...
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: (1981)22CTR(Bom)41; [1981]128ITR87(Bom); [1980]4TAXMAN381(Bom)
refer to a decision of the Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Colonel, His Highness Raja Sir once and for all. The lands at the time of requisitioning were used for agricultural purposes. In the Andhra Pradesh case asset inasmuch as it was a single payment made the acquisition of the right to enjoy the benefits granted by the or profession ; (ii) personal effects, that is to say, movable property (including wearing apparel and furniture, but excluding jewellery) held the word 'property' as referring only to those forms of property with respect to which the Legislature which enacted the Act observed (p. 431) :'But as revenue in clause (a), Income-tax Act, is used in the same sense as income, the difference 134, which was inserted by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, permits such an oral application to be made immediately after
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTV. Srisailam Vs. V. Krishna Murthy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD500
inference adverse against him. Similarly, a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Bhagwan Doss v. Bhishan Chand, that possession of joint family property is not a necessary requisite for constitution of a Hindu joint family. A family which income, which may well form the foundation of the subsequent acquisitions. These are not abstract questions of law, but questions of mess from others and that at the time of separation movable and immovable properties were partitioned. This case falls under Section plaintiff except insofar as Item No. 5 of plaint-A schedule properties is concerned.15. Sixth defendant filed a separate written statement denying of the parties as to separation was inferred from various acts of the members of the family and it was held suit. Veesamsetti Srisailam(died) | _____________________________________________________________________________________ | |Veesamsetti Buggaiah (died in 1978) Veesamsetti Rangaiah _____ | V. Ananta lakshmi [Wife D7, (died
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTLife Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Escorts Ltd. and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Reported in: AIR1986SC1370; [1986]59CompCas548(SC); (1986)1CompLJ91(SC); 1986(8)ECC189; 1985(2)SCALE1289; (1986)1SCC264; [1985]Supp3SCR909
shares for the thirteen companies. Along with their letter the Punjab National Bank also sent to the Reserve Bank, copies of the Life Insurance Corporation of India was baseless.9. The notice requisitioning a meeting of the Company the Life Insurance Corporation of India of the activity contemplated by clause (a) and the acquisition of an undertaking or shares in India of the character other interests of any member in a company shall be movable property transferable in the manner prescribed by the articles of Goods Act defines 'goods' as meaning 'every kind of movable property other than actionable claims and money; and includes stock and in this submission. Section 67 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act provides that the restriction imposed by or under Section 13 authorised dealers in the form of circulars upto 31st May, 1978. The directions have been issued under Section 73(3) of the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>