Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: punjab municipal act 1911 Court: orissa Year: 1977 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.035 seconds)

Aug 10 1977 (HC)

D. Jairaj Vs. Jeypore Sugar Co. Ltd. and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Aug-10-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Ori78; 44(1977)CLT368

..... being transferred in favour of the ten-ant for his occupation and as in that case there was no transfer by the committee under the punjab municipal act there was no letting and therefore the mere description of the premium paid by the applicant in the receipts as rent was not conclusive to ..... as rent, was in fact the license money. reference in this connection was made to air 1962 sc 554 (h. s. rikhy v. new delhi municipality) where it was held that the use of the word 'rent' in receipts was not conclusive to show that relation of landlord and tenant was created ..... a transfer of interest by the landlord in favour of the tenant. the facts in this case were that new delhi municipal committee in the year 1945 built the central municipal market lodi colony which had 32 shops with residential flats on 28 of them. in april 1945 the committee in pursuance ..... the applications on the ground that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the applicants and the committee within the meaning of that act. in support of their case of tenancy the applicants produced receipts issued by the committee wherein the payments made by the applicants were acknowledged to ..... pay the respective amounts. towards the end of 1952 however 30 of the occupants filed applications undersection 8 of the delhi and aimer rent control act praying for fixation of standard rent in respect of the premises in their respective occupation. the committeeraised a preliminay objection as to the maintainability of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 1977 (HC)

Sri Durga Saw Mill Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Jul-07-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Ori41

..... him down to the condition. .....'this decision has in terms been approved by the supreme court in the case of haridwar singh v. bagun sumbrui (supra).natesan, j. in the municipal council case (ilr (1969) 1 mad 124) also referred to this aspect by saying :'.....it may also be stated thatquite often in conditions of auction sale, a proviso is found ..... constitutes an offer and the auctioneer may accept or reject the bid. before its acceptance, the bidder has the liberty of revoking his offer. .....'a similar dispute arose before the punjab high court in an excise settlement. - kapur, j., as the learned judge then was, in the case of union of india v. narain singh, air 1953 puni 274 stated:'..... ..... not returned to us immediately, we, therefore, earnestly requestthat the d.f.o., baripada, districtmayurbhanj may kindly be directedto refund the security deposit as detailed in schedule below and forwhich act of your kindness we shallever remain grateful. ' receipt of these letters is clearly admitted in the counter affidavit. there is no scope for entertaining a second opinion that as a ..... pleaded nor advanced any contention to justify that there was consideration for the contract against withdrawal. an agreement without consideration is void as provided under section 25 of the contract act.there is admittedly no contract until by approval of the competent authority acceptance is complete. therefore, counsel for petitioner has rightly contended that the clause in question was a meaningless .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1977 (HC)

Bichitrananda Nayak Vs. State of Orissa

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Dec-19-1977

Reported in : 45(1978)CLT369; 1978CriLJ1050

..... i.p.c. would afford protection to the petitioner in this case and the act of the petitioner in storing the mustard oil would not amount to an offence. reliance was placed on a decision of the punjab and haryana high court reported in 1973 cr lj 721 (municipal committee, amritsar v. arjan singh). but the facts of that case are clearly distinguishable ..... that point. but it appears that the above evidence of the food inspector was not at all challenged by cross-examination. section 13(3) of the prevention of food adulteration act provides that the certificate issued by the director of the central food laboratory shall supersede the report given by the public analyst. sub-section (5) of that section also provides ..... orderp.k. mohanti, j.1. the petitioner has been convicted under section 16(1) of the prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 and sentenced to undergo r.i. for 3 months and also to pay a fine of rs. 500/- or in default to undergo r.i. for a further period .....

Tag this Judgment!


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