Search Results for "ordinance amendment"

502 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 502 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking to Restrain Ministers from Exercising President's Constitutional Powers. Court holds that the President exercises executive powers on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 74 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner, P.B. Samant, claiming to be an active social worker, filed a public interest litigation in the Bombay High Court seeking a writ of pro...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Considers Reference on Exemption for Bonded Warehouse Sales Under Section 5(2) of Central Sales Tax Act. Legal Issue Concerned Whether Transfer of Documents Before Filing Bill of Entry for Home Consumption Constitutes Sale in Course of Import Before Crossing Customs Frontiers.

The matter concerned two sales tax references made by the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal under Section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, arisin...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Forward Contract Prohibition; Contracts Void Under Section 3 of Travancore-Cochin Public Safety Measures Act 5 of 1950. Pre-Constitution Bill Did Not Require President’s Sanction Under Article 304(b) as No Amendment Covered by Article Was Moved.

The dispute arose from forward contracts for the purchase of coconut oil entered into in 1952 in the former Cochin State. The respondent, a commission...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds DRAT Order Requiring 25% Pre-deposit for Waiver of Appeal Under SARFAESI Act. Legal Heirs of Guarantor Must Deposit 25% of Section 13(2) Notice Amount as Condition for Hearing Appeal on Merits.

The petitioners, Smt. Julie Amitabh Parekh and others, who are the legal heirs of the deceased guarantor Amitabh Arun Parekh, filed a writ petition ch...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

WRIT PETITION NO.1430 OF 2011

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Sarpanch's Petition Challenging No-Confidence Motion. Disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 applies only to candidates for election, not to sitting members, and the no-confidence motion was validly passed.

The Petitioner, Vitthal Rajaram Shitole, was the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Koregaonmul. He filed a writ petition challenging a no-confidence motion p...