Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the salesette estates land revenue exemption abolition rules 1952 Sorted by: old Page 3 of about 1,018 results (0.165 seconds)

Dec 13 1951 (HC)

Sri Lakshmindra theertha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt and anr. Vs. the C ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1952Mad613; (1952)IMLJ557

1. (C. M. P. No. 2591 of 1951):--This and the other connected petitions relating to the Guruvayur temple and the Chidambaram temple were heard together as they all raised the question of the validity of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1926, Act II of 1927 (hereinafter called the 'earlier Act'). While these petitions were pending, the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 (Act XIX of 1951) (hereinafter called the new Act) which repealed the earlier Act was brought into force by the Madras Government on 30th September 1951 by a notification in the Fort St. George Gazette- Leave to amend the petitions was granted to the petitioners and they have been permitted to canvass the validity of the new Act as well. Mr. M. K. Nambiyar who appeared for the trustee of the Guruvayur temple argued his petition first and Mr. Alladi Krishnaswami Aiyar and the learned Advocate-General replied to that petition after which the petition relating to Guruvayur temple was allowe...

Tag this Judgment!

May 02 1952 (SC)

Visweshwar Rao Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1952SC252; [1952]1SCR1020

Mahajan, J. Petition No. 166 of 1951. 1. This is a petition under article 32 of the Constitution of India by Shri Visheswar Rao, zamindar and proprietor of Ahiri zamindari, an estate as defined in section 2 (3) of the Central Provinces Land Revenue Act, II of 1917, and situated in tehsil Sironcha, district Chanda (Madhya Pradesh), for the enforcement of his fundamental right to property under article 31(1) of the Constitution by the issue of an appropriate writ or a direction to the respondent State restraining it from disturbing his possession of the estate, and eighty malguzari villages situate in the Garchiroli tehsil of the same district. 2. The petitioner and his ancestors have been owing and enjoying these properties in full proprietary right for several generations past. On the 5th April, 1950, the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly enacted an Act called the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Right Act. The Act received the assent of the President of India on the 22nd Janu...

Tag this Judgment!

May 02 1952 (SC)

Raja Suriya Pal Singh Vs. the State of U.P. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : [1952]1SCR1056

Mahajan, J.1. These appeals under article 132(1) of the Constitution concern the constitutionality of an Act known as the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and land Reforms Act (U. P. Act I of 1951), and can be conveniently disposed of by one judgment. 2. The appellants in most of them are owners and proprietors of extensive landed properties in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Some of them are holders of estates in Oudh under taluqdari sanads granted to their ancestors by the british Government. H. H. Maharaja Paramjit Singh of Kapurthala, appellant in Appeal No. 285 of 1951, is the holder of an estate in Oudh, the full ownership, use and enjoyment of which was guaranteed to him by the Government of India under article XII of the Pepsu Covenant of Merger. Appeals Nos. 291 to 295 of 1951 have been preferred by religious institutions holding endowed properties. 3. On 8th August, 1946, the United Provinces Legislative Assembly passed the following resolution :- 'This Assembly accepts the prin...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 02 1952 (FN)

Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. Vs. Sawyer

Court : US Supreme Court

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer - 343 U.S. 579 (1952) U.S. Supreme Court Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer Argued May 12-13, 1952 Decided June 2, 1952 * 343 U.S. 579 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Syllabus To avert a nationwide strike of steel workers in April 1952, which he believed would jeopardize national defense, the President issued an Executive Order directing the Secretary of Commerce to seize and operate most of the steel mills. The Order was not based upon any specific statutory authority, but was based generally upon all powers vested in the President by the Constitution and laws of the United States and as President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. The Secretary issued an order seizing the steel mills and directing their presidents to operate them as operating managers for the United States in accordance with...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 03 1952 (HC)

In Re: Annamalai Mudaliar

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1953Mad362

ORDERRamaswami, J.1. This S. R. is sought to be filed as a Civil Revision Petition against the order dated 15-10-1951, in the nature of an award, passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Tiruvannamalai, in C. L. No. 920/50-51.2. The High Court Office thereupon took two objections viz., that this Civil Revision petition has not been filed within 90 days of the date of the order and secondly, that it does not appear that a civil revision petition of this nature can be preferred on the foot of Article 227, Constitution of India.3. Taking the first point, there is a delay of 8 days and the learned advocate is directed to file a formal petition for excusing the delay and orders will be passed excusing the delay. This aspect of the case need not detain us further.4. The maintainability of this S. R. as a civil revision petition depends upon the decision whether it would be open to the High Court to revise, the order. Under Section 51(6)(a) of Madras Act 6 of 1932 any decisio...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1952 (HC)

Lala Lachhman Dass Nayar and Others Vs. Re.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : [1952]22ITR418(P& H)

KAPUR, J. - This is a petition by L. Lachhman Dass Nayar and seven other for the issue of appropriate writs against the various officers of the income-tax department in regard to action taken and order passed by those officers.The facts of this case are rather complicated and may therefore be stated at some length. Prior to the assessment year 1937-38 Lachhman Dass petitioners along with his seven sons formed a Hindu undivided family family and were being assessed as such. For the year 1938-39 returns were made on the basis of partnership consisting of the joint Hindu family of Lachhman Dass with his seven sons as one partner having fourteen annas share and Daulat Ram one of the sons of Lachhman Dass as another partner owing two annas share. The Income-tax Officer refused to recognised this partnership as a partnership for the purposes of the Income-tax Act, but on appeal to the appellate tribunal it was held on the September 8, 1942, that this firm was registrable. On the case being t...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1952 (HC)

In Re: Lala Lachhman Das Nayar (H.U.F.) and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1953P& H55

Kapur, J. 1. This is a petition by L.: Lachhman Dass Nayar and seven others for the issue of appropriate writs against the various officers of the Income-tax Department in regard to actions taken and orders passed by those officers. 2. The facts of this case are rather complicated and may therefore be stated at some length. Prior to the assessment year 1937-38 Lachhman Dass petitioner along with his seven sons formed a Hindu undivided family and were being assessed as such. For the year 1938-39 returns were made on the basis of partnership consisting of the joint Hindu family of Lachhman Dass with his seven sons as one partner having fourteen annas share and Daulat Ram one of the sons of Lachhman Dass as another partner owning two annas share. The Income-tax Officer refused to recognise this partnership as a partnership for the purposes of the Income-tax Act, but on appeal to the Appellate Tribunal it was held on 8th September 1942 that this firm was registrable, and the case being tak...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 1952 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ram Kamal Bezbarua and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Ram Labhaya, Ag. C.J. 1. This is a first appeal from the judgment and decree of the Second Additional District Judge, U.A.D., at Jorhat, by which plaintiffs' claim was decreed to the extent of Rs. 77,000/- with proportionate costs against the Union of India. The suit was dismissed against the State of Assam. The Union of India has appealed. The suit was instituted originally against the Governor-General in Council, the Secretary of State and the Province of Assam. During its pendency in the trial Court, the Union of India was substituted for the first two defendants and the Province of Assam was described as the State of Assam. 2. The suit was for recovery of a sum of Rs. 80,200/-. This sum was claimed for trespass on and damage done to Nawpookhri Fishery of which the plaintiffs were the lessees. Plaintiffs 1 to 3 are the sons of the late C.K. Bezbaruah, plaintiff 4 (minor) is his grandson, and plff. 5 is the widow of late S.N. Bezbarua. All the plffs. claim to be the joint owners o...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 1953 (HC)

Sashibhusan Pati Vs. Mangala Biswal

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1953Ori171

Narasimham, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a declaration that the provisions of the Orissa Tenants Protection Act, 1948 (Orissa Act 3 of 1948) are void as being inconsistent with the fundamental rights guaranteed Hinder the Constitution and that proceedings under that Act pending in the Court of the Second Officer, Russelkonda, in Misc. Petition No. 38 of 1950 are without jurisdiction.2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of about 22 acres of agricultural land in Canjam district. He alleged that formerly he allowed the opposite party to cultivate about five acres of his land; but as the latter defaulted in payment of rent he evicted him as early as 1946 and took over the cultivation of the said land through his farm servants. In January 1948, the Orissa Legislative Assembly passed, an Act entitled the Orissa Tenants Protection Act, 1948, which having been assented to by the Governor-General, came into force in all the districts of the old Province...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1953 (HC)

K.C. Gajapati Narayana Deo and ors. Vs. the State of Orissa

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1953Ori185

Jagannadha Das, C.J.1. These are applications under Article 226 of the Constitution lor the issue of mandatory writs against the State of Orissa restraining them from issuing any notifications or taking any other steps under the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1 of 1952, in so far as the estates to which these applications relate. These eight applications concern eight per-manently settled estates of the ex-Madras area, which since 1-4-1936, became part of the then newly formed State of Orissa. All the applications involve substantially the same questions and are therefore dealt with together. 2. The trend of economic and political thought of the nation has insisted upon the abolition of Zamindari tenure and the elimination of intermediaries between the State and the cultivator as the first step in any general measure of agrarian reform. It has been considered that concentration of large blocks of land in the hands of a limited number of Zamindars denying fair distribution thereof to the...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //