Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-16-1960
Reported in : (1960)2MLJ425
..... of india came into force on 26th january, 1950, it did not mean that the laws which existed in ..... sufficient to add that ' extradition ' is a subject specifically provided for as the object of legislation, as item 18 of the seventh schedule, list i, in the constitution of india. we would also refer to section 18 of the indian extradition act itself, cited earlier.98. with regard to the effect of a pronouncement that certain provisions of this ..... india prior to the constitution, notwithstanding that they trace their origin to either indian legislatures constituted under british enactments or ..... india into two dominions.63. even after 15th august, 1947, paliament can make laws which would in england have effect with reference to indian matters. they would be laws operating otherwise ihan as part of the law of india. illustrations of this are : the citizenship act, 1949, in its impact on indians; the india and burma consequential provisions act, 1949.64. then when the constitution .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-21-1960
Reported in : (1961)IILLJ213Mad
..... in regard to them, and that, therefore, the same standard of protection that the american law gave to the preferred freedoms, e.g., religious freedom, should be accorded in india to all the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. it was, therefore, urged that the principle of, the decision in murdoch v. pennsylvania 87 l.ed. 1292 (supra) should be adopted when a statute, ..... definition 1 a reasonable. that the question has to be considered on the basis of the historical and other background of the legislation is settled by the authorities. in rottschaeferon constitutional law, at p. 459, it is observed-- the reasonableness of the legislature's action, however, cannot ordinarily be determined without considering the factual situation existing when the legislation ..... the prior statutes above enumerated. it deals in terms only with ownership. it plainly forbids the exercise of an ordinary property right and, on its face, denies what the constitution guarantees. a state cannot, under the guise of protecting the public, arbitrarily interfere with private business of prohibit lawful occupations or impose unreasonable and unnecessary restrictions upon them.... in ..... in the legislature the impugned statute, but not as evidence of facts they found. in pillai v. mudanayake 1953 a.c. 514 on the question of the validity of the citizenship act, 1948, of ceylon, the judicial committee observed at p. 528:it was common ground between the parties, and is in their lordships' opinion the correct view, that .....Tag this Judgment!