Narayan V The - Law Dictionary Search Results
Quic quid plantatur (or fixature) solo, solo cedit
becomes a part of it, and is subjected to the same rights of property as the soil itself, Narayan Das Khettry v. Jatindra Nath Roy Chowdhry, AIR 1927 PC 135. There is no custom of Hindu law
Criminal proceeding
the maintenance of peace and order, or orders aimed at preventing vagrancy are contemplated to be passed, S.A.L. Narayan Row v. Ishwarlal Bhagwandas, AIR 1965 SC 1818 (1821): (1966) 1 SCR 190. [Constitution of India, Art. 134(1)]
Burden of proof
it also means that on a contested issue one of the two contending parties has to introduce evidence, Narayan Bhagwantrao Gosavi v. Gopal Vinayak Gosavi, AIR 1960 SC 100: (1960) 1 SCR 773: (1960) SCJ 263. The
Keep your definitions linked to case research
Colourable legislation
transgression being veiled by what appears, on proper examination, to be a mere pretense or disguise, K.C. Gajapathi Narayan Deo v. State, (1954) SCR 1: AIR 1953 SC 375. See also Gullapalli Nageswara Rao v. Andhra Pradesh
Legislature
process and included His Majesty represented by the Governor-General of the Governor, as the case might be, Bhairebendra Narayan Bhup v. State of Assam, AIR 1956 SC 503 (510). [Constitution of India, Art. 389] The words 'Legislature'
Mutawalli
like receivers appointed over the property than trustees and they have no errate or interest in it, Mahendra Narayan v. Abdul Gafur, 59 Cal 586. Mutawalli, A 'mutawalli' is more like a manager than a trustee and so
Coparcenary
of the joint family and his sons, grandsons and great grandsons constitute a coparcenary, State of Maharashtra v. Narayan Rao Sham Rao Deshmukh, (1985) 2 SCC 321: AIR 1985 SC 716: (1985) 3 SCR 358. 'Coparcenary' is
Years
been retained in the Act by mistake or oversight and it should be read in the singular, Bhairendra Narayan Bhup v. State of Assam, 1956 SCR 303: AIR 1956 SC 503 (512). [Assam State Acquisition of Zamindari's
Malikana
possessory of rights in them when they are let in farm or held in khas by Government, Mahendra Narayan v. Abdul Gafar, 59 Cal 746.
Accommodation
for residential purposes' and 'accommodation let for non-residential purposes' are used distinctly in clear and unmistakable terms, Prem Narayan Barchhiha v. Kakmuddin Saifi, AIR 1999 SC 2450 (2452): (1999) 6 SCC 381. [M.P. Accomodation Central Act, 1961
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »
Try the research workspace - 7 days free