Search Results for "suo motu summoning"

86 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 86 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Quashes Suo Motu Reopening Notice Under Ceiling Act for Being Time-Barred — Limitation Period of 3 Years Under Section 45(2) of Maharashtra Agricultural Land (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 Must Be Strictly Adhered To.

The petitioners, legal heirs of deceased Sidram Ganpatrao Solunke, were original land holders in proceedings under the Maharashtra Agricultural Land (...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Sessions Court Order Under Section 311 Cr.PC for Lack of Jurisdiction After Case Posted for Judgment. Sessions Court Cannot Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 Cr.PC Once Matter Reserved for Judgment.

The petitioners, accused nos.1 to 3 in S.C.No.239/2017 pending before the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi, for offences punishable under Sections 3...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Quashing Suo Moto Notice Under Section 45(2) of Maharashtra Agricultural Land Ceiling Act Due to 16-Year Delay. The Court Held That Revisional Power Must Be Exercised Within Reasonable Time, and a Delay of 16 Years Is Unreasonable.

The petitioner, Ansiram Gundiram Gavane, was a landholder in Parbhani, Maharashtra. In 1975, he filed a return under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Agr...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petitioner in Land Ceiling Case Due to Limitation Bar. Additional Commissioner's Suo Moto Notice Under Section 45(2) of Maharashtra Agricultural Land (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 Issued After Eight Years Held Without Jurisdiction.

The petitioner, Tukaram S/o Gopalrao Nakate, a resident of Hadgaon, District Parbhani, filed a return under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Agricultural...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petitioner in Land Ceiling Case Due to Limitation Bar. Suo Moto Reopening Notice Under Section 45(2) of Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 Quashed as Issued After 16 Years.

The petitioner, Shivram A. Galbe, was a landholder in village Devegaon, Tq. Pathri, Dist. Parbhani. He filed a return under Section 12 of the Maharash...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petitioner in Ceiling Act Case Due to Inordinate Delay in Reopening Enquiry. Suo Moto Enquiry Under Section 45(2) of Maharashtra Agricultural Lands Ceiling on Holdings Act, 1961 Cannot Be Initiated After 17 Years from Original Order.

The petitioner, Ashok Rangrao Deshmukh, a resident of Parbhani, filed returns under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands Ceiling on Holdin...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petitioner in Land Ceiling Case Due to Limitation Bar. Suo Moto Enquiry Under Section 45(2) of Maharashtra Agricultural Land (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 Initiated After 17 Years Held Without Jurisdiction.

The petitioner, Madhavrao Laxmanrao Karhale, a resident of Parbhani, filed a return under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Land (Ceiling on ...