Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: punjab municipal act 1911 Court: rajasthan Year: 2007 Page 1 of about 15 results (0.027 seconds)

Jul 12 2007 (HC)

Assistant Director, Land and Building Tax Department and ors. Vs. Bhar ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-12-2007

Reported in : RLW2008(1)Raj439

..... assessing the annual value of row of quarters in one block as a 'building' for the purpose of levying house tax under the punjab municipal act, 1911. the expression, 'building' in the punjab municipal act, 1911 is defined in clause (2) of section 3 of the act to mean 'any shop, house, hut, outhouse, shed or stable, whether used for the purpose of human habitation or otherwise and ..... whatever purpose used but does not include-(a) a tenant or other such protable structure.(b) a dwelling house erected on a holding as defined in the rajasthan tenancy act, 1955 (rajasthan act 3 of 1955) by the tenant for his own occupation or a cattleshed or a store house or any other construction for agricultural purposes erected or set up by ..... case of tata engineering & locomotive co. ltd. v. gram panchayat, pimpri waghere : [1977]1scr306 while dealing with the expression 'houses & lands' used in section 89 of the bombay village panchayat act, 1933 accorded approval to the aforesaid observations made in the cases of yorkshire fire and life insurance company and grant. in paragraph 15 of the report, the supreme court observed ..... , all lead to the irresistible conclusion that a portion of a building owned and possessed separately by different persons is a different unit for the purpose of assessment under said act.circular no. 27/74sd/-s.l. joshidirectorlands and buildings tax deptt.,rajasthan, jaipur.10. the state government itself looked into the question whether different portions of a building occupied .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 2007 (HC)

Modern Educational and Cultural Society Vs. Nizam and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-04-2007

Reported in : RLW2007(4)Raj3214

..... ors. : (2004)5scc182 the dispute was regarding open spaces earmarked for developing the parks used by the inhabitants of the locality. the scheme was approved by the municipal corporation under the punjab municipal act, 1911. when the scheme had been approved and duly developed and the open space was being used by the inhabitants, the respondent filed a suit claiming the said land, ..... which was dismissed. appeal there against was allowed by the first appellate court. the municipal corporation went in appeal to the supreme court against that judgment. the hon ..... to be used by public in general stand dedicated to the public for common objective and must therefore remain with the state and its instrumentalities such as ida, municipal board, municipal corporation or any other public authority. such open spaces cannot be allotted to any private person or body. their use cannot be changed or converted by the jda ..... the rightful common destiny, according to a 'master plan' based on careful and comprehensive surveys and studies of present conditions and the prospects of future growth of the municipality, and embodying scientific teachings and creative experience.32. the significance of a development planning cannot therefore be denied. planned development is the crucial zone that strikes a balance .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 2007 (HC)

Pradeep Hinger Vs. State of Raj. and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-16-2007

Reported in : RLW2008(1)Raj456

..... a land allotted to the petitioner's own party wing, the petitioner did not initiate any proceedings except giving a notice under section 170 of the rajasthan municipalities act. that act is also completed and concluded act. the petitioner being elected member, if has not taken any action to the extent which could have been taken had any other person would have been ..... intuc when the intuc converted the land to commercial use, no effective step was taken, obviously by the petitioner except sending a notice under section 170 of the rajasthan municipalities act on 20.4.2006. according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the enquiry report submitted by the additional director himself dated 24.1.2007, the finding has ..... according to the learned counsel for the respondents, it appears that the petitioner deliberately gave notice under section 170 of the municipalities act to favour the intuc, to avoid any action for cancellation of allotment of the property and recovery of municipal property.19. the learned counsel shri n.m. lodha submitted that before passing order of suspension of chairman or member ..... tarlochan dev sharma v. state of punjab and ors. : [2001]3scr1146 . the same is the position about the second allegation which is allegation that the petitioner on conversion of land allotted on concessional rate to intuc to commercial use, has not taken any further action except issuing notice under section 170 of the rajasthan municipalities act. assuming for the sake of argument .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 2007 (HC)

Dinesh Pouches Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-21-2007

Reported in : (2008)16VST387(Raj)

..... the government, both civil and military, and to local bodies, and big private concerns. borough municipality was governed by the bombay municipal boroughs act, 1925, which was an enactment brought into force even before the commencement of government of india act, 1935, replacing the borough act of 1911. under the bombay municipal boroughs act, 1925, before its amendment from may 5, 1954, under section 73(1)(iv), it ..... 1947 fc 14, that imposition of octroi (without refunds) on import of wheat among other grains within municipal limits as notified by municipality of lahore vide punjab government gazette dated february 6, 1940 was beyond jurisdiction of provincial legislation or municipality in exercise of its power to impose local taxes, as it falls within entry 58 of federal list under the government of india ..... orissa : [1975]2scr138 , g.k. krishnan v. state of tamil nadu : [1975]2scr715 , international tourist corporation v. state of haryana : [1981]2scr364 , malwa bus service (pvt.) ltd. v. state of punjab : [1983]2scr1009 , mrs. meennakshi alias rama bai v. state of karnataka : air1983sc1283 , b.a. jayaram v. union of india : [1983]3scr624 , state of maharashtra v. madhukar balkrishna badiya : air1988sc2062 .67 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 2007 (HC)

Bhagwan Das Mittal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-12-2007

Reported in : RLW2007(3)Raj1713

..... . in two petitions, the ground is set out that they have been transferred from one municipal board to another municipal board without their consent but no challenge to the section 310-a of the rajasthan municipality act, 1959 has been made in these petitions. the common grounds for their transfers to a ..... and other service conditions. petitioners have not challenged section 310-a of the rajasthan municipalities act, 1959, which empowers the state government to transfer a member of subordinate ministerial or class iv service from one municipal board to another. this point has been dealt with in preceding paragraph in case ..... decide a case bearing in mind the administrative exigency....47. some of the petitioners have challenged that they belong to the service of one municipal board and cannot be transferred to the service of another board which is a different service. such a transfer order can be made protecting ..... term transfer and within two years of the superannuation, was reversed by the supreme court allowing the civil appeal preferred by the state of punjab, observing as under:this court has time and again expressed its disapproval of the courts below interfering with the order of transfer of public ..... a proposition was also before the apex court in the case title state of punjab and ors. v. joginder singh dhatt (supra), the supreme court dealt with similar direction of the high court of state of punjab. the supreme court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the high .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2007 (HC)

Vallabh Darshan Hotel Private Limited and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-29-2007

Reported in : RLW2007(4)Raj2900

..... and ors. v. gir har saroop and ors. air 1940 pc 7, gheesu das v. narsingh kansara and ors. 1999(3) wlc (raj.) 586, abdul karim khan and ors. v. municipal committees, raipur : [1965]3scr300 , radhakishan and anr. v. state of raj. and ors. , k.p. jamadar v. k.m. irany and ors. : air1973bom130 , marathwada walf board v. rajaram ramjivan manthri ..... zavfer louis anothony benedict aldo costa v. stanislaus costa and ors. : air1968mad161 , v. rajaram v. ramanujam iyengar and ors. : air1963mad213 , panchayat deh, through sarpanch and gram sabha, garhi brahman v. punjab walf board, ambala and anr. , atmaram v. gulamhusein gulam mohiyaddin and anr. : air1973guj113 , nagar wachan mandir v. akabaralli abdulhussain 1994(3) civil lj 35, mushir mohammed khan (dead) by l ..... air 2002 bom 144, b. gowra reddy (deceased by l.rs. and ors. v. government of andhra pradesh and ors. : air2002ap313 , punjab walf board v. gram panchayat alias gram sabha air 2000 sc 3488, r.v.e. venkatachala gounder v. arulmigu viswesaraswami and v.p. temple and anr. : air2003sc4548 . the state of ..... gheesu dass's case (supra), this court held that the suit by such person under section 22 of the act of 1959 is not maintainable. the decision of the hon'ble supreme court delivered in the case of abdul karim khan v. municipal committee, raipur : [1965]3scr300 was followed by the single bench in the case of geesu das(supra). the question .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 2007 (HC)

Cynamid Agro India Ltd. and 10 ors. Vs. State and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-20-2007

Reported in : RLW2008(1)Raj614

..... in instant cases and vague reference has been made which is not a sufficient compliance of mandatory requirement as provided under section 33 of the act. in support, counsel placed reliance upon decision of apex court in municipal corporation of delhi v. ram kishan : 1983crilj159 and of this court in bharat insecticides v. state 1997 (1) wlc 690, taken note of db ..... be perpetuated further in future. chief secretary of state is directed to issue instructions in the light of observed (supra) to authorities concerned empowered to file complaints under insecticide act, drugs & cosmetics act, pfa act, or any other law in which such precautions are required to be taken.27. consequently, both the misc. petitions are hereby allowed. complaints and further proceedings as against ..... itself has expired, which has resulted in violating their statutory right to get the sample re-tested under section 24(4) of the act. in support, counsel placed reliance upon reliance upon series of decisions of apex. court in municipal corporation of delhi v. ram kishan (supra); state of haryana v. unique farmaid : 2000crilj2962 and of this court in united phosphorus ..... cover and sending of the sample to the central insecticides laboratory at that late stage would be of no consequence. this issue is no longer res integra. in state of punjab v. national organic chemical industries ltd. : (1996)11scc613 , this court in somewhat similar circumstances said that the procedure laid down under section 24 of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 04 2007 (HC)

Parmeshwar Patidar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-04-2007

Reported in : RLW2007(4)Raj3512

..... of such degree courses and have the ultimate result of the teachers' training course. learned counsel has relied on the decisions of the hon'ble supreme court in state of punjab v. nestle india ltd. and anr. : [2004]269itr97(sc) ; and jai narain parasrampuria (dead) and ors. v. pushpa devi saraf and ors. : (2006 ..... with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, they are being heard and decided together.2. in sbcwp nos. 1817/2997, 1819/2007, 1820/2007, 1911/2007, 2114/2007, 2864/2007, 2388/2007, 1899/2007 and 2635/2007, the validity of proviso 2nd to rule 266 of the rajasthan panchayat raj rules, ..... having done so, it cannot refuse to publish his result. the apex court further held that it is a serious matter if a student who acts upon one interpretation of a rule and spends a considerable period of his youth is later threatened by a possible alternative construction, which may cost ..... he had allowed or encouraged another to assume to his detriment. accordingly, the principle would apply if at the time the expectation was encouraged both parties were acting under a mistake of law as to their rights.17. in seema kumari sharma (mrs.) v. state of h.p. and anr. (supra), the ..... of estoppel by acquiescence was not restricted to cases where the representor was aware both of what his strict rights were and that the representee was acting on the belief that those rights would not be enforced against him. instead, the court was required to ascertain whether in the particular circumstances, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 2007 (HC)

Kamal Kishore Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Dec-07-2007

Reported in : RLW2008(1)Raj192

..... take away from a successful plaintiff, what he has obtained under a judgment.30. in northern india caterers (pvt.) ltd. v. state of punjab reported in air 1967 sc 19817 it has been held as under:the rule of construction is that where a statute provides in express terms that ..... of conflicting opinions of various high courts, has been set at rest by later decision of the supreme court in ashok marketing limited v. punjab national bank reported in air 1991 sc 885, whereby the legislation relating to the relationship of landlord and tenant including the rent control will now ..... premises let out for residential purposes for rs. 7000/- or more in municipal area of jaipur city, rs. 4000/-or more at the divisional headquarters and rs. 2000/- or more in case of other municipal areas to which act extends, the legislature has not transgressed its competence in making the law because ..... than 50 years and its objects and reasons were broadly as follows:statement of objects and reasonsthe rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950 (act no. 17 of 1950) has been in force for nearly five decades and during these years the situation prevailing with regard to the premises ..... shall, after holding such summary inquiry as it may consider just and necessary, determine the standard rent for such premises and shall, in doing so, act according to the following principles, namely-where the premises are let for residential purposes or for any of the purposes of the public hospital, aushadhalaya .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 11 2007 (HC)

Poonam Chand Bhandari Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-11-2007

Reported in : RLW2008(1)Raj885

..... to constitute a body for a particular purpose. secondly, the purpose for which the board has been constituted does not fall 'within the ambit of jaipur development authority act or the municipal corporation act. the petitioner has also questioned the manner in which land is proposed to be allotted to persons mentioned in schedule 'a' to the writ petition namely international habitat ..... appears that the said board has been constituted to promote investment in the state. the grievance of the petitioner is that two statutory bodies namely, jaipur development authority and the municipal corporation are in place in the city of jaipur and, therefore, there was no need to constitute any board. the submission is wholly fallacious. firstly, it is the ..... nandlal jaiswal (1986) scc 566; sachidanand pandey v. state of west bengal : [1987]2scr223 ; brij bhushan v. state of jammu and kashmir : air1986sc1003 and g.b. mahajan v. jaigaon municipal council : air1991sc1153 held that although ensure, fair play are transparency in state action, distribution of largese by inviting open tenders or 1 public auction is desirable but it cannot be ..... a. under the said rules. reliance is placed on the decisions viz. commissioner of police v. goverdhan das bhanji : [1952]1scr135 ; state of assam v. keshav : [1953]4scr865 ; state of punjab v. hari kishan sharma : [1966]2scr982 ; the pratabpore co. limited v. cane commissioner of bihar : [1969]2scr807 and chandrika jha v. state of bihar and ors. : [1984]1scr646 .ii) .....

Tag this Judgment!


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