Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the punjab cinemas regulation act 1952 Year: 1982 Page 1 of about 21 results (0.060 seconds)

Dec 20 1982 (HC)

National Assn. of Motion Pictures Exhibitors, Delhi Vs. Union of India ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-20-1982

Reported in : ILR1983Delhi691

..... the notification dated 21-11-1980 issued by the central government in exercise of the powers conferred by section 2 of union territories laws act, 1950 extending to the union territory of delhi, the punjab cinema regulations act, 1952 being punjab act ii of 1952 as at present in force in the state of haryana. proposition no ix : (19) the argument under this head is that sections ..... sachar, j. (1) does delhi administration lack competency in law to fix rates for admission to cinematograph exhibition in cinema houses notwithstanding the extension of the punjab cinemas regulations act, 1952 (hereinafter to be called the punjab act 1952), as at present in force in state of haryana to delhi by means of notification dated 21-11-1980 iss,ued by the central government under section 2 ..... power he invoke by virtue of notification of 21-11-1980 issued in exercise of powers of section 2 of the union territories act, 1950 by which the central govt. has extended to delhi the punjab cinemas regulation act, 1952 as is in force in the state of haryana and the further notification of 11-12-1980 issued by the administrator by which he ..... the licensees. our conclusions are as follows : (1) that the notification dated 21-11-1980 issued by the central government under section 2 of the union territories (laws) act, 1950 extending to union territory of delhi the punjab cinema regulations act, 1952 as at present in force in state of haryana is valid and constitational; (ii) section 7a and section 7b of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 1982 (HC)

The Chandigarh Administration and ors. Vs. Surjit Kesar

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-06-1982

Reported in : AIR1983P& H142

..... answer to the question posed at the outset is rendered in the affirmative to the effect that a temporary licence for a touring cinematograph granted under section 5 of the punjab cinemas (regulation) act, 1952 and the rules framed thereunder is essentially transient and migratory in nature.16. now on the aforesaid finding it inevitably follows that the length of the operation of a ..... s.s. sandhawalia, c.j.1. whether a temporary licence for a 'touring cinematograph' granted under section 5 of the punjab cinemas (regulation) act, 1952 and the rules framed thereunder, is essentially transient and migratory in nature--comes to be the spinal issue in these two connected appeals under clause x of the letters ..... the union territory. the respondent-writ petitioner surjit kesar secured a temporary licence (for six months in the first instance) for a touring cinematograph under rule 3 of the punjab cinema (regulation) rules, 1952(hereinafter called 'the rules') in january, 1977. the respondent-writ-petitioner's averments that the licence was given in pursuance of a policy decision and that an understanding was ..... is the fact that the relevant ss. 3, 4 and 5 of the act and indeed the whole statute did not in terms provide for any categorisation of different kinds of licences or the duration thereof. this was, however, provided by the promulgation of the punjab cinemas (regulation) rules, 1952(hereinafter called the rules) which made detailed provisions with regard thereto which have been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 17 1982 (SC)

Sampuran Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-17-1982

Reported in : AIR1982SC1407; 1983(1)Crimes49(SC); [1982(45)FLR272]; (1982)IILLJ281SC; 1982(1)SCALE647; (1982)3SCC200; 1982(2)SLJ551(SC)

..... a permanent cinema hall. pending the application, instructions were issued by the state government that all such applications for licence shall be forwarded ..... decision was quite different from the question involved in the case in hand.15. in state of punjab and anr. v. hari krishan sharma : [1966]2scr982 the sub-divisional officer had been constituted the licensing authority, under section 4 of the punjab cinemas (regulation) act, 1952, for the concerned area. the respondent made an application to him for a licence to construct ..... necessary implication the removing authority may be higher in rank to the appointing authority.12. in commissioner of police, bombay v. gordhandas bhanji : [1952]1scr135 an application for permission to build a cinema on a site within the city of bombay was rejected by the commissioner of police. the respondent applied for re-consideration of his application and ..... the commissioner, acting on the advice of the cinema advisory committee, granted the application on the 16th july, 1947, though he indicated in an affidavit filed later that but for this advice he would .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1982 (HC)

Ram Puri, Chandigarh Vs. Chief Commissioner, Chandigarh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-18-1982

Reported in : AIR1982P& H301

..... dated july 13, 1905, the estate officer resumed the site and forfeited the whole of the money paid under s. 9 (since repealed) of the capital of punjab (development and regulation) act, 1952 (hereinafter called 'the act'), because there had been a breach of r. 12 of the chandigarh sale of sites rules, 1962, for the building not having been completed within time. the ..... be no order as to costs.s.s. sandhawalia, c.j.45. whether the resumption designedly envisaged by the legislature inserting s. 8-a in the capital of punjab (development and regulation) act, 1952, connotes in essence a divestiture of title, and not merely a temporary divesting of possession only is one of the significant questions, which has necessitated this reference to the ..... the gazette of india extraordinary dated the 18th december, 1972:--'the supreme court in jagdish chand radhey shyam v. state of punjab, (civil appeal no. 1099 of 1967) declared section 9 of the capital of punjab (development and regulation) act, 1952 (punjab act xxvii of 1952), as in force in the union territory of chandigarh, as being violative of articles 14 and 19(1)(f) of the ..... (the judgment of which was prepared by me and concurred by d. s. tewatia, j.) had the occasion to interpret s. 8-a of the capital of punjab (development and regulation) act, 1952 (for short the act) and in particular the meaning of the words 'resume' and 'resumption' occurring prominently therein. the view thus taken came to be doubted very often necessitating its re .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 1982 (HC)

Kalwa Vs. Vasakha Singh and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-01-1982

Reported in : AIR1982P& H480

..... pervades throughout the spirit of the pre-emption law. indeed this is made wholly manifest when an analytical eye is turned on the amendment of section 15(2) of the act by punjab act 13 of 1964. prior to that, doubts had arisen whether under sub-section (2), the son of a female vendor from another husband would be within the class of ..... into the community of strangers in race and religion and thus protect compactness of village communities and for that reason, this right was considered mere corollary of the general principles regulating the succession to and power of disposal of land and since it was the last means by which a natural heir could retain ancestral property in the family when he ..... untouched.'112. even if sub-section (2) is treated as a non obstante clause, the result would not be any different.113. in aswini kumar ghose v. arabinda bose, air 1952 sc 369, it was laid down (para 27)-'the enacting part of a statute must, where it is clear, be taken to control the non obstante clause where both cannot ..... avoided. it is well in this context to recall the classic rebuke of lord simond to denning. l. j. in major and st. mellons rural district council v. newport corporation, 1952 ac 189 (house of lords) in the following terms:--'....................................................... the duty of the court is to interpret the words that the legislature has used; those words may be ambiguous, but .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 29 1982 (TRI)

income-tax Officer Vs. P.N.B. Finance Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Dec-29-1982

Reported in : (1983)4ITD665(Delhi)

..... company.3. after the nationalisation of the punjab national bank ltd., the company carried on business in terras of the following resolution adopted at the extraordinary general meeting of the company held on 20-1-1971: resolved that the company do continue the business of banking as defined in section 5(b) of the banking regulation act, 1949. subject to the receipt of ..... permission from the reserve bank of india and that the company do continue to engage in other forms of business under section 6(i) of the said act and in accordance with the provisions of the objects clause of the company's ..... and conditions of the offer of option remained the same as contained in circular letter dated 28-2-1973.5. a petition under section 101 of the companies act, 1956 was made by the punjab national bank ltd. before the high court, for confirming the reduction of share capital as proposed by special resolution dated 25-9-1973. the said resolution stated ..... that very day. under the ordinance, the entire undertaking of the punjab national bank ltd. stood transferred to the corresponding new bank, viz., punjab national bank. the ordinance was replaced by the banking companies (acquisition and transfer of undertakings) act, 1970, which was retrospectively effective from 19-7-1969. under this act, the amount of compensation for the entire undertaking was fixed at rs .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1982 (HC)

Bhikamsingh Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-28-1982

Reported in : 1982(2)BomCR352; [1982]134ITR310a(Bom); (1982)IILLJ304Bom

..... first respondent. admittedly, this appointment was on a probation for one year and subject to the bombay state transport employees' service regulations issued under s. 45 of the aforesaid act.2. the appointment order fixes the pay scales and the relevant portion of it reads as under :'on his appointment as ..... regarding the working of the petitioner were being sent by the executive engineer, nagpur to the second respondent who is the 'competent authority' under regulation 10. some of the reports indicate that his working was satisfactory and some reports indicate otherwise. the respondents have maintained the confidential record of ..... learned counsels for the petitioner, had invited our attention to two supreme court decisions in support of their propositions. they are the case of state of punjab v. dharam singh, reported in : [1968]3scr1 and the case of the superintendent of police, ludhiana and others v. dwarka das, reported in ..... last decisions dealing with the question of the right of a probationer in details was given in the case of kedar nath v. state of punjab, reported in : air1972sc873 , the supreme court laid down that :'where a person is appointed as a probationer in any post and a period ..... due to may judicial pronouncements made from time to time. the first relevant case on the point is of s. sukhbans singh v. the state of punjab, reported in : (1963)illj671sc . it was held that a 'probationary cannot, as rightly pointed out by the division bench, automatically acquire the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 1982 (HC)

D.L. Suresh Babu and Etc. Vs. Institute of Chartered Accountants of In ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jul-05-1982

Reported in : AIR1983Kant43

..... regional councils respectively and complete the elections on the basis of the calendar of events already issued (annexure-r2) in accordance with the act and the regulations.43. rule issued is made absolute in both the cases but, in the circumstances of the cases, i direct the parties to bear ..... operates independently without reference to the four infirmities set out earlier. the power of the panel is not circumscribed by the four infirmities enumerated in regulation 67 (10) only. in this view the panel had the power to reject the nominations, if there were defects of a substantial character. ..... of harayana himachal pradesh jammu & kashmir and punjab and the union territories of delhi & chandigarh 4 to expire some time in sept., 1982. 6. in exercise of the powers conferred by the act and the chartered accountants regulations. 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the regulations) to reconstitute the aforesaid councils before the ..... relied on a large number of rulings of the supreme court commencing from the very first case of n.p. ponnuswami v. returning officer : [1952]1scr218 to the latest case in a.k.m. hassan uzzaman v. union of india : (1982)2scc218 , and several other high courts of ..... of a nomination paper under the mysore village panchayats and local boards act, 1959 and the rules before the completion of elections in the light of the principles enunciated by the supreme court in ponnuswami's case : [1952]1scr218 observed thus :'the principle that there should be no interruption .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 1982 (SC)

Sat Pal Gupta and anr. Vs. State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-05-1982

Reported in : AIR1982SC798; 1982(1)SCALE89; (1982)1SCC610; [1982]3SCR196; 1982(14)LC178(SC)

..... conferred by section 3 of the act cannot be exercised for the purpose of regulating its sale or supply. this contention has been negatived by the high court.3. it is true that the power conferred by section ..... is either cattle fodder or foodstuff, it would be an essential commodity and the central government or its delegate, the state government, would have the power to regulate its production, supply and distribution, and trade and commerce therein.4. coming first to the question argued by shri maheshwari as to whether rice bran is a ..... any other officer authorised by the director in that behalf. the appellants filed a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution in the high court of punjab and haryana, challenging clause 3 of the aforesaid control order, on the ground that rice bran is not an essential commodity and therefore, the power ..... drawn by shri bhagat, who appears on behalf of the haryana government, to a decision of this court in sachdeva & sons and ors. v. state of punjab and ors. (civil appeal no. 817 of 1980 decided on may 7, 1980) in which it was held that rice bran is 'cattle fodder' within the ..... are of the view that rice bran, being a foodstuff, is an essential commodity.10. the decisions in the state of bombay v. virkumar gulabchand shah [1952] 2 s.c.r. 877 and shriniwas pannalal chockani v. the crown a.i.r (38) 1951 nag 226 which were cited by shri maheshwari and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 22 1982 (HC)

Jeevakaruna Annadana Samajam, Chittoor Vs. Assistant Commissioner, End ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-22-1982

Reported in : AIR1982AP214

..... which has been taken by the supreme court in m/s. raghubar dayal jai prakash v. union of india : [1962]3scr547 . in that case s.6 of the forward contracts (regulation) act, 1952 which imposes certain restrictions on the recognition of an association was attacked as violating the right to form associations guaranteed under art. 19(1)(c) of the constitution. it was ..... displace these first impressions. damyanti v. union of india (supra) has been considered by the aforementioned judgment of the constitution bench in d. a. v. college, jullundur v. state of punjab : air1971sc1737 (supra) and also by a five judge bench of this court reported in seethapath nageswara rao v. govt. of a. p : air1978ap121 (fb) (supra). these cases interpreted damyanti's ..... right under art. 19(1)(c) was rejected by the supreme court. the above judgment was cited with approval and authority in d. a. v. college, jullundur v. state of punjab : air1971sc1737 (supra). a five judges judgment of this court rejected similar argument in seethapath nageswara rao v. govt. of a. p., : air1978ap121 (fb), our court has observed (st p.130 ..... upon two judgments of the supreme court one reported in damyanti v. union of india, : [1971]3scr840 and the other reported in d. a. v. colege, jullundur v. state of punjab, : air1971sc1737 . but i must say that his strong reliance is on damyanti's case and he merely referred to certain observations in d. a. v. college case.7. the right .....

Tag this Judgment!


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