Jacob V The - Law Dictionary Search Results
Guardian
s. 4 (2)] The guardian contemplated by this s. includes every kind of guardian known to law, Rosy Jacob v. Jacob A Chakranmal, AIR 1973 SC 2090 (2098): (1973) 1 SCC 840. (Guardian and Wards Act, 1889, s.
Subordinate
subordinates also who have no connection with the function with which the business or transaction is concerned, R.G. Jacob v. Republic of India, AIR 1963 SC 550 (553): (1963) 3 SCR 800. (Indian Penal Code, 1860, s. 165)
Incidental
more; but the distinction between an incidental proceeding and a supplemental proceeding being obvious cannot be ignored, Vareed Jacob v. Sosamma Geevarghese, (2004) 6 SCC 378. 'A thing is incidental to another if it merely appertains to something
Keep your definitions linked to case research
Agricultural Holdings Act, 1923
holding to compensation from the landlord for the improvement, the compensation being such sum as fairly represents the value of the improvement to an incoming tenant, allowance being made for any benefit allowed by the landlord in
Copy, true copy
the vital defect cannot be permitted to be cured after the expiry of the period of limitation, T.M. Jacob v. C. Poulose, (1999) 4 SCC 274: AIR 1999 SC 1359 (1369). [Representation of the People Act, 1951, s.
Fruit
replaced the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1908, which itself had replaced the Market Gardeners Compensation Act, 1895, see Saunders-Jacob v. Yates, (1933) 2 KB 240 (market garden includes part of private premises so treated). As to importation and
Replevin
sell the goods; though, indeed, they may be replevied at any time before they have been sold, see Jacob v. King, (1814) 5 Taunt. 451. An action for replevin may be commenced in the High Court, and if
Market garden
of the trade or business of market gardening.' Market garden includes part of private premises so treated, Saunders Jacob v. Yates, (1933) 2 KB 240. Schedule III. gives the special improvements for which a market gardener can claim
Supplementary proceedings
where the action is pending is called upon to exercise its jurisdiction in the interest of justice, Vareed Jacob v. Sosamma Geevarghese, (2004) 6 SCC 378 (399). (Civil PC, 1908)
Criminal negligence
of which the charge has arisen, it was the imperative date of the accused person to have adopted, Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab, (2005) 6 SCC 1.
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »
Try the research workspace - 7 days free