Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: punjab municipal act 1911 Court: gujarat Year: 1971 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.042 seconds)

Oct 08 1971 (HC)

Parasram Manjimal and ors. Vs. the Kalol Municipality, Kalol

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-08-1971

Reported in : AIR1972Guj54; (1972)0GLR497

..... that has been put before us, as also before the magistrate and the sessions judge is, that under section 90 of the bombay district municipal act, the municipality has authority to discontinue or stop up any public street, and, therefore, they have power to discontinue or stop up a part of such ..... application, being special civil application no.1415 of 1968 challenging that the said notice was without authority and jurisdiction as section 233 of the gujarat municipalities act under which the said notice was issued was ultra vires and ineffective as it offended art. 14 of the constitution of india. in the ..... they were without jurisdiction and authority on the various grounds stated in the memo of petition contending inter alia, that section 185 of the gujarat municipalities act, 1963 under which the impugned notices were issued was ultra vires as offending art, 14 of the constitution.3. in special civil application no ..... specified period of one year or more at a time with the permission of the state government under s. 65(2) of the gujarat municipalities act. the petitioners have erected wooden cabins on these lands. it also appears that the last lease made in favour of the petitioners in respect ..... to the vires of section 185 of the gujarat municipalities act, 1963, also has no substance. mr. bhatt has in support of this contention relied on the decision of the supreme court in the case of northern india caterers (pvt) ltd. v. state of punjab : [1967]3scr399 . it was urged that there .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1971 (HC)

Wadhvan City Municipality at Wadhavan City, Surendrangar Vs. the Zalaw ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Mar-04-1971

Reported in : AIR1972Guj50

..... rates. on april 9, 1957, the respondent-company was served with a notice under section 54 of the indian electricity act, 1910 and thereafter on april 24, 1957, the appellant municipality filed the suit out of which the present appeal arises. the trial court decreed the suit on july 14, 1959 ..... call them, was october 8,. 1952 but with retrospective effect. on august 30, 1956, the respondent-company wrote to the appellant informing the appellant-municipality that it proposed to charge rates for street lights at a higher rate than before viz., at five annas per unit. from november 1, 1956 ..... respondent-company purchased the assets and liabilities of its predecessor. in 1952, the respondent-company revised the rates which were being charged to the appellant-municipality and the revision was by way of an increase in the existing rates. in respect of that revision there was an arbitration proceeding and on september ..... supreme court in amalgamated electricity co.'s case (supra); and, therefore, the observations of lord halsbury quoted above or of the full bench of the punjab high court in santa singh v. rajinder singh (fb), regarding the value of precedent and dicta in judicial pronouncements have no application to the case ..... that the law is not always logical at all.'this passage from the speech of lord halsbury was cited with approval by the privy council in punjab co-operative bank ltd. v. commr. of income-tax. of the report, lord maugham stating the opinion of the privy council has quoted .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 1971 (HC)

Patel Chaturbhai Nanabhai Vs. Patel Mohanbhai Nanabhai and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Dec-14-1971

Reported in : AIR1972Guj217

..... of the plaintiff, plaintiff being the owner of it. so, for mutation of that property to the name of plaintiff, in city survey as well as municipal records. defendant no. 1 has to give a statement. as regards the fields, described as lots nos. 4 and 5, which are allotted to the plaintiff ..... from the order recording the compromise, and it cannot be taken in execution of the decree. the high courts of andhra pradesh, madhya pradesh, patna, punjab and rajasthan have also taken the same of calcutta has said that such terms cannot be enforced in execution of the decree, but they may be enforced ..... the contention raised by the appellant that the execution of the decree is barred by limitation. as said earlier by me, article 136 of the new act makes the position crystal clear. period of limitation commences when the decree becomes enforceable. in the instant case, this part of the decree which is ..... would arise and consequently, right to apply would arise. admittedly, from those dates, this execution application was filed within three years. even if the old act was to govern the period of limitation. it cannot be said that this application is time-barred.16. mr. zaveri invited my attention to the decision ..... those liabilities arose. in my opinion, as this darkhast has been filed on 11-11-1968 and the events having taken place after the new act came into force, the article which would govern the period of limitation would be article 136 and the period provided is twelve years. furthermore, that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 1971 (HC)

Patel Naranbhai Jinabhai Vs. Patel Gopaldas Venidas

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Dec-16-1971

Reported in : AIR1972Guj229

..... mr. singhvi wishes to urge are points which cannot be urged on a review application.'20. a division bench of the bombay high court in girdharlal masukhbhai gandhi v. kapadvanj municipality, air 1930 bom 317, has observed: 'a court hearing an application for review has no jurisdiction to order a review because it is of opinion that a different conclusion of ..... reason' in order 47, rule 1, civil procedure code, would be interpreted to mean 'a reason sufficient on grounds at least analogous to those specified immediately previously.' in this case, the punjab chief court had granted an application for review on the ground that the judgment proceeded on an incorrect exposition of law. this, it was held, was not a sufficient ground ..... (iii) ..... ...... ....... (iv) in reversing the order of the executing court reviving the execution, the high court exercised a jurisdiction not conferred on it by section 115. the high court therefore acted in excess of its jurisdiction when it entertained a revision against the order of the executing court and set it aside in exercise of that jurisdiction and remanded the case ..... that does not amount to deciding a case, but it amounts to deciding a question regarding the admissibility or certain evidence. therefore, when the court decided questions under the evidence act, it was not deciding a case and therefore, its decision could not be the subject matter of revision under section 115 of the civil procedure code. the expression 'case decided' need .....

Tag this Judgment!


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