Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: citizenship constitution of india Year: 1955 Page 1 of about 14 results (0.033 seconds)

Feb 15 1955 (HC)

Kamlabai Vs. Devram Sona Bodgujar

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-15-1955

Reported in : AIR1955Bom300; (1955)57BOMLR568; ILR1955Bom749

..... force -- that there cannot be two domiciles in respect of citizens of india, and be, therefore, resists the application of any principle which is based on considerations of domicile.whether or not the constitution of india permits a plea of dual citizenship and dual domicile to beraised, in dealing with questions pf the application ..... apply when there is conflict of laws of different sovereign states. but there is authority for the proposition that where the law in one province in india is different from the law in another province, the two provinces must be regarded as analogous to two sovereign, states : air1940bom362 .14. strong ..... to suffer some hardship. but such hardships in rare cases are the inevitable consequence of provincial legislation in regard to a subject which is all-india in character.the bombay legislature may well claim to have taken long strides in the matter of legislation for social reform. but where social ..... the provisions of the act and the decision merely said that the fact that the marriage took place at a place outside the limits of india, cannot succeed in excluding the application of the provisions of the said act. in my opinion, this decisioncannot afford any assistance to mr. ..... the contract are governed by the law of the place where the contract was made; and where, therefore, the law of one province of british india is distinct from, the law of another province, the two provinces must be regarded, for the purposes of this rule, as analogous to foreign .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 1955 (SC)

D.P. Joshi Vs. the State of Madhya Bharat and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-27-1955

Reported in : AIR1955SC334; [1955]1SCR1215

..... 1) against discrimination based on place of birth cannot apply to a discrimination based on domicile. 10. it was argued that under the constitution there can be only a single citizenship for the whole of india, and that it would run counter to that notion to hold that the state could make laws based on domicile within their territory. but ..... the union legislature. of course citizenship is different from domicile. but i mention this here only to emphasize the view, that consistently ..... category (b) in requiring madhya bharat domicile and precedent residence for five years follows closely the pattern of indian citizenship based on category (c) of article 5 of the constitution with 'domicile of madhya bharat' substituted for 'domicile of india' and this raises the question of the concept of regional domicile (tending to the growth of the idea of ..... the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of india'. it is extremely unlikely therefore that regional personal laws will be allowed to become operative in any substantial measure. it may be also mentioned that there is single citizenship under the constitution for the whole of india and that 'citizenship and naturalisation' have been listed within the exclusive competence of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 1955 (HC)

Laxmichand and ors. Vs. Mst. Tipuri and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-27-1955

Reported in : AIR1956Raj81

..... constitution did not consider it wise to introduce the conception of dual citizenship in india as in the united states of america.it seems ..... at the time of passing them cannot become effectual under this article throughout what is now the territory of india,then, article 5 which introduces the conception of a single citizenship throughout india also, in my humble judgment, cannot produce that effect. it must be remembered that the indian constitution is federal in character though it is true that the framers of our ..... to me clear that our constitution-makers sought to strike a just balance between the autonomy ..... of the several units composing the federal state and the solidarity of a unitary state which is best engendered on the foundation of a single citizenship.be that as it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1955 (HC)

Amrita Bazar Patrika Ltd. Vs. Board of High School and Intermediate Ed ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jun-17-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All595

..... court and in my opinion a corporation cannot be held to be a 'citizen' within the meaning of article 19 of the constitution of india.33. learned counsel for respondent no. 1 cited certain well-known text-books in support of the contention that in the united ..... , article 5 says :'(5) at the commencement of this constitution, every person 'who has his domicile in the territory of india and (a) who was born in the territory of india, or(b) either of whose ..... right of having access to the results of the respondent board. learned counsel relies on clauses (a) and (g) of article 19(1) of the constitution of india which read as follows :'19(1) ah citizens shall have the right -- (a) to freedom of speech and expression; * * * *(g) ..... case would have to be considered in deciding the questions that arose.10. reference was made to article 19(1) (a) and (g) of the constitution of india, learned counsel urged that the petitioner had a fundamental right of freedom of expression. learned counsel relied on -- 'lovell v. griffin', (1937) 303 ..... to practise any profession, or to carry onany occupation, trade or business.' 21. the first question which requires consideration is whether the petitioner is a 'citizen.' within the meaning of the article, citizenship is dealt with in part ii of the constitution .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 1955 (HC)

State of Bombay Vs. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwalia and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-12-1955

Reported in : AIR1956Bom1; (1955)57BOMLR288; ILR1955Bom680

..... is relevant is the provision! contained in article 5.but that article only deals with the citizenship: at the commencement of the constitution and it lays, down who was a citizen at the commencement of the constitution. every person domiciled in india and i who satisfied any one of the three conditions can be a citizen.he should have ..... or whose parents were born in the territoryof india, or who was ordinarily resident in the territory of india for not less than five years immediately preceding the commencement of the constitution. it is a curious omission in the constitution!that no provision is made as to citizenship after thecommencement of the constitution. article 11 provides:'nothing in the foregoing provisions ..... at p- 213 :'.....now, in construing the various entries in this list, certain basic facts have to be borne' in mind. the government of india act gave to india a federal constitution with well defined legislative powers for the centre and the provinces and also a field of legislation with concurrent powers for both. the provincial legislature within ..... of this part shall derogate from the power of parliament to make any provision with respect to the acquisition and termination of citizenship .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1955 (FN)

Employees Vs. Westinghouse Elec. Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-28-1955

..... substantive law for application in suits under it. pp. 348 u. s. 441 -449. 2. in the present suit, there is neither diversity of citizenship nor a "federal question" in the traditional sense. therefore, a serious constitutional question would arise if 301 were construed to authorize this suit in a federal court. pp. 348 u. s. 449 -452. 3. this ..... why it is necessary in this field to abandon the diversity of citizenship requirement. in fact, i doubt that it can be abandoned constitutionally. the constitution, as you know, limits suits in the federal courts to cases arising under the constitution and the laws of the united states or involving diversity of citizenship." id. at 56. [ footnote 14 ] h.rep.no.245, 80th ..... that is not covered by the statute. the interpretation contained in the preceding paragraph conforms to the words of the section, and avoids suggesting page 348 u. s. 465 constitutional limitations that would cripple the creation of a national system for the enforcement of statutes concerning labor relations. mr. justice douglas, with whom mr. justice black concurs, dissenting. ..... 15 ] directed page 348 u. s. 449 attention to the fact that state law would govern actions under 301, and that this, diversity jurisdiction apart, would raise a substantial constitutional question. no denial of the first of these assertions appears. senator taft did not justify 301 as dependent on federal substantive law governing interpretation of collective bargaining contracts: "mr. president .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 1955 (SC)

The State of Bihar Vs. Kumar Amar Singh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-10-1955

Reported in : AIR1955SC282; 1955(0)BLJR278; [1955]1SCR1259

..... husband, captain maharaj kumar gopal saran narayan singh, who, it is not disputed, throughout continued to be in india. the learned judges of the high court apparently had article 5 of the constitution in mind and acted on the view of the english law that the wife's domicile continues throughout to ..... above, it will now be convenient to deal with these two appeals separately. appeal no. 98 which raises the fundamental question as to the continuing citizenship of kumar rani will be taken up first. civil appeal no. 98 of 1952. 4. this appeal arises out of the application to the high ..... judgment of the high court of patna on two applications to it dated the 5th july, 1950 and 28th july, 1950, under article 226 of the constitution. the state of bihar is the appellant in both the appeals. the first three respondents in appeal no. 97 are the sons of the fourth ..... completely overlooked article 7 of the constitution. the relevant portion of article 5 of the constitution says as follows : 'at the commencement of this constitution, every person who has his domicile in the territory of india and who was born in the territory of india shall be a citizen of india'. 5. in the view of ..... , framed by the central government under section 4 of the influx from pakistan (control) act, 1949, provides that a permit for permanent resettlement in india may be granted by the high commissioner or deputy high commissioner only after securing the agreement of the state or the province where the applicant intends to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 1955 (HC)

Radhabai Mohandas Vs. State of Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-21-1955

Reported in : AIR1955Bom439; (1955)57BOMLR827; 1955CriLJ1564; ILR1955Bom1039

..... 'someother state' to institute proceedings in a matrimonial cause in 'that other state' under certain conditions. (see section 10 of the act).14. under the government of india act and also under the constitution each state in the indian union has its own legislature, which is empowered to enact jaws on certain subjects. although therefore the laws passed by the central legislature ..... they were to mean 'residence in the province of bombay without present intention of removing it from the province of bombay'. there are observations in the judgment that 'before the constitution of india came into force, there was nothing like domicile in the province of bombay', that 'there was only one domicile and that was the domicile of ..... and benefit of persons residing in the province, and consequently a law for the province within the legislative competence of the provincial legislature. the wide powers conferred by the constitution on a state legislature should not be interpreted so as to allow its laws to' be defeated by the simple expedient of crossing the state boundary and doing the prohibited ..... edn. 11. domicile, therefore, 'denotes the relation between a person and a particular territorial unit possessing its own system of law'. (cheshire, p. 157). it is different from nationality or citizenship. it determines his personal status and the law applicable to him in matters such as majority or minority, marriage, divorce and succession. the law recognizes separate domicile of each territory .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 1955 (HC)

State Vs. Bhaishankar Uttamrai and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-05-1955

Reported in : AIR1956Bom660; (1956)58BOMLR435; 1956CriLJ1186; ILR1956Bom511

..... the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the scheduled castes and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.similarly, by article 17, (constitution of india) untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. the enforcement of any disability arising out of untouchability is made an offence punishable in accordance with law. prohibition ..... a construction which the legislature, having the removal of harijans' social disabilities at heart, did not intend and which would defeat the directive embodied in article 46 of the constitution of india which says that the state shall promote with special care educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the scheduled castes and ..... of the act, and we know that the underlying object of the act is furtherance of social justice which requires that the rights of citizenship -- there is only one kind of citizenship in this country, namely the citizenship of india--which are enjoyed by other hindus shall not be denied to harijans simply because of the incidence of their birth.when the legislature said ..... intention of the legislature in enacting the bombay harijan (removalof social disabilities) act, 1946, was to wage a crusade against an evil which amounted to denial of equal rights of citizenship to the harijans who are no less the citizens of this country than the other hindus, and this object of the act must not be lost sight of when we .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 23 1955 (FN)

Bart Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-23-1955

..... columbia circuit syllabus 1. summoned to testify before a congressional investigating committee, petitioner refused to answer certain questions on the ground of his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. the committee did not specifically overrule his objection or direct him to answer. held: in his trial for a ..... only to count 8. * we think the record also shows that the committee rejected the pertinency objections on the other four questions which constitute the other four counts, and therefore petitioner willfully refused to answer these as well. however, since conviction on any one count is sufficient ..... supplied.)" "mr. bart: i object to this question. i will not answer it, standing on my rights in accordance with article v of the constitution, and furthermore i protest because this committee has asked this question of numerous people and has infringed upon their rights as american citizens." "mr. tavenner: ..... mr. bart. i have already stated my reply to this question as far as i am concerned." "mr. walter. how can you claim citizenship by virtue of your father's citizenship if you don't know what name you father used when he became a citizen?" "mr. unger. mr. chairman -- " page 349 ..... worth anything." "mr. unger. i have no further comment on the question." "mr. walter. all right." "mr. bart, you claim citizenship by virtue of your father's citizenship; is that right?" "mr. bart. that is right." "mr. walter. under what name did your father become a citizen of the united .....

Tag this Judgment!


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