Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: bombay high court letters patents amendment act 1948 maharashtra section 2 amendment of letters patent of 8th december 1823 Page 1 of about 46 results (0.388 seconds)

Jan 11 2005 (SC)

Jamshed N. Guzdar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2005SC862; 2005(3)BomCR139; JT2005(1)SC370; 2005(2)MhLj392; 2005(1)MPHT497; 2005MPLJ181(SC); (2005)2SCC591; 2005(2)LC812(SC)

..... for trial by itself any suit or proceeding from the city court.'25. by section 3 of letters patent (amendment) act, 1948, clause 12 of the letters patent was amended. the amended portion reads:-'.......the high court shall not have such original jurisdiction in cases falling within the jurisdiction of the small causes court at bombay or the bombay city civil court.'26. under section 4 of the 1948 act, power was conferred on the provincial government to enhance pecuniary ..... decree or order passed after the commencement of the act in any suit or other proceedings pending in the high court since before the commencement of the act. he sought ten days time to have instructions from the state of maharashtra in this regard. thereafter, on the basis of the letter no. 37-pf 2131097 dated 17th december, 2004 of principal secretary & r.l.a., state of ..... additional civil court for greater bombay'. the said act came into force on 16th august, 1948. at about same time the bombay legislature also passed the letters patent (amendment) act, 1948 (act no. 41 of 1948) amending clause 12 to exclude the original jurisdiction of the high court as regards cases which fall within the jurisdiction of the small causes court and city civil courts. the relevant provisions of the 1948 act are set out below:-'1. (1)...........................................(2) it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 1992 (HC)

Jamshed N. Guzdar Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1992Bom435; 1992(3)BomCR494; (1992)94BOMLR984

..... notification issued by the provincial government and published in the official gazette. simultaneously with the passing of the above act, the bombay legislature also enacted act no. xli of 1948 called the bombay high court letters patent amendment act 1948. by s. 3 of that act, clause 12 of the letters patent was amended by adding the following words; 'the high court shall not have such original jurisdiction in cases falling within the jurisdiction of the small causes ..... 226 of the constitution of india challenging the constitutional validity of the bombay city civil court and bombay court of small causes (enhancement of pecuniary jurisdic-tion and amendment) act, 1986 (maharashtra act no. xv of 1987) -- hereinafter referred to as 'the impugned act'. 2. apart from challenging the competency of the state legislature as regards the impugned act the petitioner has also sought a declaration that the notification dated 20th ..... the said appeal before the supreme court : (1) whether the city civil court act was ultra vires the legislature of the province of bombay in so far as it dealt with the jurisdiction and powers of the high court and city civil court with respect to matters in list i of seventh schedule, govt. of india act, 1935; and (2) whether section 4 of the act was void as it purported .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1986 (SC)

Umaji Keshao Meshram and ors. Vs. Radhikabai, Widow of Anandrao Banapu ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1986SC1272; (1986)88BOMLR432; 1986(1)SCALE681; 1986Supp(1)SCC401; [1986]1SCR731; 1986(2)LC319(SC)

..... letters patent. by the indian high courts act, 1865 (28 & 29 vict., c. 15), the time for issuing fresh letters patent was extended to january 1, 1866. in pursuance of the above power, the letters patent issued in 1862 for establishing the three chartered high courts were revoked and replaced by letters patent dated december 28, 1865, which, with amendments, still continue to be the letters patent of those high courts.61. clause 2 of the 1865 letters patent of the bombay high court ..... maharashtra'. by section 28 of the bombay reorganisation act, a separate high court was formed for the state of gujarat from the appointed day. section 28(1) of that act further provided that 'the high court of bombay shall become the high court for the state of maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as 'the high court of bombay').' section 41 of the bombay reorganisation act provided as follows:41. permanent bench of bombay high court ..... its own special facts by section 3 of the assam revenue tribunal (transfer of powers) act, 1948, the assam high court was empowered to exercise such ..... letters patent issued on december 8, 1823, established at bombay a court of record to be called 'the supreme court of judicature at bombay.' it is interesting to note that in those days when there was no income-tax, under the said act of 1823, bombay ..... the constitution as finally passed (see basu's 'introduction to the constitution of india', eighth edn., pp. 13 to 18; basu's 'commentary on the constitution of india' .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 11 2006 (SC)

Kamal Kumar Dutta and anr. Vs. Ruby General Hospital Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : [2006]134CompCas678(SC); (2006)5CompLJ511(SC); JT2006(7)SC333; 2006(7)SCALE668; [2006]70SCL222(SC)

..... by the clb and against that appeal has been provided before the high court under section 10f of the act, that is an appeal from the original order. then in that case no further letters patent appeal shall lie to the division bench of the same high court. this amendment has taken away the power of the letters patent in the matter where learned single judge hears an appeal from the ..... to respondents.19. in this connection, our attention was invited to a decision of the bombay high court in the case of maharashtra power development corporation limited v. dabhol power company and ors. reported in : 2004(3)bomcr317 . in that case, the high court took the view that despite the amendment in section 100a of the code of civil procedure, order passed by the single judge in appeal ..... position that the law which would prevail would be the law at the relevant time. at the relevant time neither section 100a nor section 104(2) barred a letters patent appeal. the words used in section 100a are not by way of abundant caution. by the amendment acts of 1976 and 2002 a specific exclusion is provided as the legislature knew that in the absence of such words .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 20 1997 (HC)

ivory Traders and Manufacturers Association Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1997IIIAD(Delhi)333; 2(1997)CLT273; 67(1997)DLT145; 1997(42)DRJ131

..... (1)(f) and (g) thereof. in appeal, the letters patent bench modified the order of the learned single judge and declared section 372(g) and part of section 385 of the act invalid. the state of maharashtra then preferred an appeal to the apex court. while setting aside the impugned judgment of the letters patent bench of the bombay high court, the supreme court held that reasonableness of the restriction imposed upon the ..... after giving due opportunity to ivory traders to dispose of their existing stocks. xxxx xx (18) the amendments effected by the wild life (protection) amendment act, 1991, in the principal act, which the petitioners challenge, read as under : 5.amendment of section 2.--in section 2 of the principal act- (a)in clause (2), for the words 'has been used', the words 'has been used, any (and) ivory imported into india ..... 37 of the wild life (protection) amendment act, 1991 (act no. 44 of 1991) (for short `the amendment act') and the corresponding amendments/changes carried out in the principal act known wild life (protection) act, 1972. these amendments/changes have been effected : (1) in section 2(2); (2) by introduction of clause (c) in sub-section (1) of section 39; (3) by omission of clause (ia) from sub-section (1) of section 44; (4) by replacement of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 20 1997 (HC)

M/S. Ivory Traders and Manufacturers Association and Other Vs. Union o ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR1997Delhi267b; ILR1997Delhi22

..... (1)(f) and (g) thereof. in appeal, the letters patent bench modified the order of the learned single judge and declared section 372(g) and part of section 385 of the act invalid. the state of maharashtra then preferred an appeal to the apex court. while setting aside the impugned judgment of the letters patent bench of the bombay high court, the supreme court held that reasonableness of the restriction imposed upon the ..... after giving due opportunity to ivory traders to dispose of their existing stocks. xx xx xx18. the amendments effected by the wild life (protection) amendment act, 1991, in the principal act, which the petitioners challenge, read as under :--5. amendment of section 2.-- in section 2 of the principal act,-- (a) in clause (2), for the words 'has been used', the words 'has been used, any (and) ivory imported into india ..... of the wild life (protection) amendment act, 1991 (act no. 44 of 1991) (for short 'the amendment act') and the corresponding amendments/changes carried out in the principal act known as wild life (protection) act, 1972. these amendments/changes have been effected: (1) in section 2(2); (2) by introduction of clause (c) in sub-section (1) of section 39; (3) by omission of clause (ia) from sub-section (1) of section 44; (4) by replacement of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2009 (HC)

Shri Sanjay Z. Rane, Vs. Smt. Saibai S. Dubaxi (Since Deceased Through ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2009(111)BomLR2668

..... of bombay high court over maharashtra and extending it to union territory of goa, what is the need of section 4 44. we may here refer to the judgment of honble apex court p.v. hemalatha v. kattamkandi puthiya maliackal, saheeda, and anr. (supra) where provisions of section 52 of states reorganisation act, 1956 fell for consideration. the question was whether said section saved applicability of letters patent of madras high court to ..... to prevail and the area mentioned becomes insignificant. judgments in case of the palestine kupat am bank co-operative society ltd. v. government of palestine and ors. reported at air 1948 pc 207 and roy and co. and anr. v. sm. nani bala dey and ors. reported at : air1979cal50 are cited. 16. judgments relied upon by advocate kakodkar while urging that ..... compensation higher than the one awarded by the collector. the division bench found that amended section 25 put fetters on the courts awarding any sum to interested person in excess of what has been awarded by the collector and also without any reference to claim under section 9(2) of the act. the division bench concluded that in case the claimant puts a claim in writing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 2008 (HC)

Avtar NaraIn Behal Vs. Subhash Chander Behal

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 154(2008)DLT140

..... was introduced in the code of civil procedure by section 38 of the code of civil procedure (amendment) act, 1976 (act 104 of 1976), which came into force with effect from 1.2.1977. the section inserted read as follows:100a. no further appeal in certain cases.-notwithstanding anything contained in any letters patent for any high court or in any other instrument having the force of law for the ..... submission was also made that if clause 15 does not apply, appeal would lie under section 483 of the companies act. in this connection reliance was placed on a decision of the supreme court in arati dutta v. eastern tea estate (p) ltd. : [1988]1scr1070 and of the bombay high court in maharashtra power development corporation ltd. v. dabhol power co. : air2004bom38a . on the other hand, on ..... the high court under section 483 of the act. but that is not the situation in the present case. therefore, this decision cannot be of any help to the respondents.25. in this connection, our attention was invited to a decision of the bombay high court in maharashtra power development corporation ltd. v. dabhol power co. in that case, the high court took the view that despite the amendment in section 100 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 27 2008 (HC)

Ajabrao Mahadeorao Choudhary Vs. the Principal, Kala Vanijya Mahavidya ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(6)ALLMR33; 2008(6)MhLj436

..... jamshed n. gazdar (supra). in that matter the issue was about the constitutional validity of the bombay city civil court and bombay court of small causes (enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction and amendment) act, 1986 (maharashtra act xv of 1987) and maharashtra high court (hearing of writ petitions by division bench and abolition of letters patent appeals) act, 1986 maharashtra act xvii of 1986, which has received the ascent of the president on 28.02.1986. the ..... -10-1997. the clauses which are not reproduced deal with the orders passed under various enactments like payment of gratuity act, bombay prohibition act, maharashtra land revenue code, bombay stamp act, electricity (supply) act, 1948, indian railways act, motor vehicles act, maharashtra universities act etc.the relevant portion of section 53 of the 1998 act, reads as follows:1) there shall be a grievance committee in each university to deal with the grievance of ..... dispute before us that orders impugned in all these writ petitions are passed by grievance committee in exercise of quasi-judicial powers. thus subject to express provisions made by clause 2 b of chapter i of appellate side rules and writ petitions challenging orders of administrative tribunals or special tribunals created under the constitution of india, all other matters are required .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 2008 (HC)

Mohd. Riyazur Rehman Siddiqui Vs. Deputy Director of Health Services

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2009ACJ585; 2008(6)MhLj941

..... of the president on 30th december 1999, it was not enforced because of various factors. clause (b) of section 100a was subsequently deleted finally and as already noticed, by the amending act of 2002, present section 100a was introduced. present section 100a reads as under:13. section 100a. notwithstanding anything contained in any letters patent for any high court or in any other instrument ..... ignored the fact that the view of the division bench of bombay high court in maharashtra power development corporation limited's case (supra) was not approved by the supreme court in kamal kumar dutta 's case (supra), and in fact, diametrically opposite view has been expressed by the supreme court which we have already discussed in some detail. it was ..... . : air2004sc5152 . in that case, the court was primarily concerned with bar under section 104(2) of the civil procedure code and clause 15 of letters patent of madras high court. the apex court again affirmed the principle of harmonious construction of section 104 which leads to the conclusion that section 104(1) saves letters patent appeal and bar of section 104(2) of the civil procedure code does not apply. the ..... collector of bombay v. issac penhas air 1948 bom 103, where the court held as under:55. on the preliminary point as to whether an appeal lies, there ' has been a long and continuous controversy in the different high courts as to the true meaning to be given to the expression 'judgment' in clause 15 of the letters patent. i .....

Tag this Judgment!


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