Judgment Search Results Home Phrase:judicial officers protection act
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1979AP253
... court below rejecting the plaint is contrary to law and without jurisdiction. he laid particular stress on the word used namely 'judicially- in s 1-a of judicial officers' protection act, 1850 and contended that the judicial officer is protected only when he acts judicially and not merely because he acts in a judicial capacity. he also placed stress an 'good faith. and if it can be shown that the ... judicial officer has not acted in good faith, he is not entitled to protection under the act. in defence of this argument, he relied upon certain facts ... respondent has got jurisdiction to deal with the matter. even thought a person who does not have the jurisdiction, acts in good faith thinking that he had got jurisdiction, he would be entitled to protection under section 1-a of the judicial officers' protection act. but we need not go to that extent in the present case as the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent ... of rs. 28,355-86. the plaint was rejected by the learned subordinate judge in view of s. 1-a of the judicial officers protection act. 1850 as amended by a state amendment by the state of andhra pradesh (vide a.p. act xxiii of 1958, sec. 3 and schedule (1-2-1960) ). the said section reads as follows:--'no judge, magistrate, ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2001)3MLJ691
... -section (2) is to the effect that the provisions of indian evidence act and indian oaths act shall apply to such inquiries. sub-section (3) lays down that the officer holding inquiry shall be deemed to be a person acting judiciously within the meaning of judicial officers protection act, 1850. from the above provisions of the act, it is very clear that if a deputy commissioner wants to hold an ... commissioner, joint commissioner or commissioner can conduct an enquiry or hear an appeal and for which the 'civil procedure codecivil procedure codecivil procedure code, the indian evidence act and the indian oaths act' would apply and the deputy commissioner shall be deemed to be a person acting judicially within the meaning of judicial officers protection act, 1850. all these would show that the enquiry contemplated under section 63 shall be a quasi ... -judicial proceeding. but the enquiry that was conducted by the deputy commissioner was only a general public enquiry and nothing more than that. in the enquiry in the present ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1962All137
... fully within the jurisdiction of the magistrate concerned.16. finally, it is argued on behalf of the respondent that even if his suit is barred by the provisions of the judicial officers' protection act, mere notice under section 80 is not subject to any such bar. but the only way to save the notice from being branded as contempt of court is to show ... . muhammad sharafatullah khan, air 1917 all 355(2). that case, however, was one in which the plaint on the face of it disclosed a cause of action with which the judicial officers protection act had nothing to do. in the present case the plaint of the suit filed by the respondent is not before me, but i take it that it is based on ... case could legally file a suit against the magistrate.7. the judicial officers' protection act, 1950, 1 provides as follows :--'no judge, magistrate, justice of peace collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any civil court for any act done or ordered to be done by him in the discharge of judicial duty, whether or not within the limits of his jurisdictions ... act complained of.'this section affords protection to a judge or magistrate acting judicially in two classes of cases: (a) in respect of acts done or. ordered to be done within the limits of his jurisdiction, and (b) for acts done or ordered to be done outside the limits of his jurisdiction. in the first class of cases the protection afforded by the act is absolute and the officer ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2006(6)ALLMR139; 2006(5)MhLj639
... peace, collector or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in ... by the defendant no. 1 under the above two acts, it would be appropriate to quote section 1 of the judicial officers' protection act of 1850 and section 3 of the judges (protection) act, 1985. section 1 of the judicial officers protection act of 1850 reads as under:1. non-liability to suit of officers acting judicially, for official acts done in good faith and of officers executing warrants and order:- no judge, magistrate, justice of ... the suit did not disclose any cause of action and secondly on the ground that the suit was barred under the judicial officers protection act of 1850 (hereinafter referred to as the 1850 act) and the judges (protection) act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 1985 act). the plaintiffs by reply dated 23rd september, 1996 opposed the application for rejection of the plaint filed by the plaintiffs. after ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1965Kant214; AIR1965Mys214; 1965CriLJ225; ILR1964KAR1046; (1964)2MysLJ300
... and which is really of importance in this case is this: 'as regards the claim against defendant no. 2, the contention of the appellants is that he is not protect by the judicial officers' protection act, as he was bound to carry out the order of defendant no. 1 to search and seize the goods until and unless a prescribed form. the concluding portion of ... before the magistrate when he made the search, the search was not permissible. that view was upheld in appeal by the chief justice of the calcutta high court and harrington judicial officers' protection act., who took the same view which was taken by the trial judge.the privy council had no difficulty in reaching the conclusion that that view was unsupportable and depended largely ... , mr. government pleader asked us in the first instance to say that the district judge missed entirely the importance of s. 1 of the judicial officers' protection act (central act xviii of 1850) and s. 43 of the police act (central act v of 1861) and that if he had only correctly understood the import of these two sections, he would have found it impossible to rest ... breaking open the locks of the almirah, the table drawers and the suit cases; (d) whether the defendant is entitled to the protection of s. 1 of the judicial officers' protection act (central act xviii of 1850) and s. 43 of the police act (central act v of 1861); and (e) whether the damages awarded to the plaintiff are excessive. (13) on all these matters, the findings of ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1966MP223
... 173 (179) and labour relations board v.john east iron works ltd., 1948 ac 134 (149).9. as i read section 1 of the judicial officers' protection act, 1850, it seems clear that the words 'in the discharge of his judicial duty' have been used in contradistinction to the exercise of administrative or executive functions in the discharge of which the authority is not bound ... preliminary point in the trial court that the suit be dismissed as he is a judicial officer and is protected by the judicial officers protection act, 1850. the trial judge has postponed decision of that issue saying that it would be decided after recording evidence of both the parties inasmuch as before any protection is given to the defendant, the fact that he had jurisdiction to do the ... or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any civil court for any act done or ordered to be done by him in the discharge of his ... mr. d'souza is a magistrate, the suit should be dismissed as he is protected and that there can be no enquiry whatever as to malice or otherwise, nor even as to absence of an occasion to effect the plaintiff's arrest.5. section 1 of the judicial officers' protection act (no. xviii of 1850) enacts that no judge, magistrate, justice of the peace, collector ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(4)MPHT58
... barred under the provisions of judicial officers' protection act, 1850 and judges (protection) act, 1985. shri girish dcsai, learned deputy advocate general, however, contended that the collector stamps is only an administrative officer though entrusted to perform certain quasi judicial functions but he is not a judicial officer or a judge within the meaning of the aforesaid tow acts of 1850 and 1985.6. the judicial officer's protection act, 1850 protects judicial officers against being sued in ... judicial officers' (protection) act, 1850, it is obvious that immunity from legal action contemplated by this act will also be available to him.'high court of kerala in c.v. sankara pillai, 1991 (1) kerala law journal 418 has held that ... legal position on the point is made luculent by the supreme court in s.p. god, (1996) 1 scc 573, wherein the apex court dealing with the provisions of the judicial officers' (protection) act, 1850, vis-a-vis the collector stamps, clearly held :'since 'collector' has been specifically mentioned along with judges, magistrates and justices of peace in the ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1991CriLJ613
... the same. a judge of the high court certainly answers the description of 'public servant' within the meaning of s. 21 ipc, and the provisions of the judicial officers' protection act, 1850. 14. in respect of judges of superior courts and inferior courts, a notable change was brought about in regard to their liability, both civil and criminal, for ... an identical question, after noticing the relevant provisions in the constitution of india, the indian penal code, the criminal procedure codecriminal procedure codecriminal procedure code, the judicial officers' protection act and the contempt of courts act, came to the conclusion that : '...... a judge of the high court discharging judicial functions, in our opinion, is not an employee of the state government or central government and is not employed exclusively ... time of the commission of the alleged offence, in connection with the affairs of the state. so far as civil liability of a judge is concerned, the judicial officers' protection act, 1850 grants immunity for any act done or ordered to be done by him in good faith in the discharge of his official duty, whether or not the ... acts committed or purported to have been committed by them in the discharge of their judicial functions, by the judges (protection) act, 1985 enacted by parliament. by s. 2, 'judge' is defined as not only every person who is officially ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2001(3)AWC2038
... consolidation authorities, while exercising their judicial power is exceedingly wide so that they may act fearlessly, impartially and with a sense of security. the judicial officers' protection act is extendable even in those cases where consolidation authorities have ... acted without jurisdiction in passing judicial orders, on the basis of which revenue recordsare corrected. vague allegations ... p. consolidation of holdings act. entries incorporated on the basis of judicial orders are made subject to appeal and revision under the said act.6. it is well to remember that all the consolidation authorities, while exercising their powers in deciding objections, appeals or revisions, perform their duties as judicial officers and they are protected under the judicial officers' protection act, 1850. under the aforesaid act, the immunity granted to ...Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 121(2005)DLT98; 2005(81)DRJ715
... pradesh high court would reveal that the plaint came to be rejected for the reason that claim predicated qua defendant no. 1 was barred by law (judicial officers protection act, 1850). of course, the division bench held in addition that if any part of the claim is barred under any law, suit as a ... maintainable against him for any act performed in judicial capacity and in good faith. 46. since the plaint as a whole was rejected, submission made before the ... defendant no. 3 was an executive officer of the decree holder and defendant no. 4 was the counsel who appeared for defendant no. 3. plaint as a whole had been rejected as it was held that the defendant no. 1 was entitled to the protection of judicial officers protection act, 1850 and no suit would be ... is rent or license fee, amount paid is more than rs.3,500/- per month and, thereforee, defendant would not have the protection of the delhi rent control act, 1958.75. having not denied that it was paying license fee/rent to the father of the plaintiff and on his demise to ... suit premises being ground floor portion of the building constructed on plot no. b-87, mayapuri industrial area phase-i, new delhi, comprising right side office rooms, centre bay and godown and one bay without any portion of the terrace (total covered area of 8450 sq.ft. approx. plus open lane ...Tag this Judgment!