Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (1.28 seconds)
Documents citing The Zandu Pharmacutical Works Ltd. vs G.J. Desai on 28 August, 1969

Pukhrajmal Sagarmal Lunkad (Deceased ... vs The Municipal Council And Ors. on 23 December, 2004

(b) in lieu of any such amount by granting the land-owner or the lessee, subject, however, to the lessee paying the lessor or depositing with the Planning Authority, Development Authority or Appropriate Authority, as the case may be, for payment to the lessor, an amount equivalent to the value of the lessor's interest to be determined by any of the said authorities concerned on the basis of the principles laid down in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Floor Space Index (F.S.I.) or Transferable Development Rights (T.D.R.)
Bombay High Court Cites 40 - Cited by 0 - A P Deshpande - Full Document

Dhiraj Uttam Ashtankar And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 28 May, 2024

So also it appears that the two Constitutional Bench decisions, which consider similar provisions and similar pleas, in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah WP 340 of 2023.odt 59 (supra) as well as the decision of the hon'ble Apex Court in Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. G. J. Desai, Civil Appeal No.1034 of 1967 decided on 28th August, 1969 (reported in 1969 UJ (SC) 575 and MANU/SC/0520/1969) (supra) have not been brought to the notice of the hon'ble Court in Hari Krishna Mandir Trust (supra), in view of which in light of what has been held by the two Constitutional Bench decisions in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah (supra), it will have to be held that Hari Krishna Mandir Trust (supra) would not constitute a good precedent to follow, as we would be bound by what has been held by the two Constitution Benches in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah (supra). The pleas of discrimination based upon Article 14 of the Constitution as well as of Sec.97 to 100 of the MRTP Act, being violative thereof, thus cannot be sustained and are turned down.
Bombay High Court Cites 87 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shri. Suryanarayan S/O Pandurangji ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 28 May, 2024

So also it appears that the two Constitutional Bench decisions, which consider similar provisions and similar pleas, in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah WP 340 of 2023.odt 59 (supra) as well as the decision of the hon'ble Apex Court in Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. G. J. Desai, Civil Appeal No.1034 of 1967 decided on 28th August, 1969 (reported in 1969 UJ (SC) 575 and MANU/SC/0520/1969) (supra) have not been brought to the notice of the hon'ble Court in Hari Krishna Mandir Trust (supra), in view of which in light of what has been held by the two Constitutional Bench decisions in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah (supra), it will have to be held that Hari Krishna Mandir Trust (supra) would not constitute a good precedent to follow, as we would be bound by what has been held by the two Constitution Benches in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah (supra). The pleas of discrimination based upon Article 14 of the Constitution as well as of Sec.97 to 100 of the MRTP Act, being violative thereof, thus cannot be sustained and are turned down.
Bombay High Court Cites 87 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vitthal Haribhau Barde, Thr. P.O.A., ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 28 May, 2024

So also it appears that the two Constitutional Bench decisions, which consider similar provisions and similar pleas, in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah WP 340 of 2023.odt 59 (supra) as well as the decision of the hon'ble Apex Court in Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. G. J. Desai, Civil Appeal No.1034 of 1967 decided on 28th August, 1969 (reported in 1969 UJ (SC) 575 and MANU/SC/0520/1969) (supra) have not been brought to the notice of the hon'ble Court in Hari Krishna Mandir Trust (supra), in view of which in light of what has been held by the two Constitutional Bench decisions in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah (supra), it will have to be held that Hari Krishna Mandir Trust (supra) would not constitute a good precedent to follow, as we would be bound by what has been held by the two Constitution Benches in Shantilal Mangaldas and Amichand Shah (supra). The pleas of discrimination based upon Article 14 of the Constitution as well as of Sec.97 to 100 of the MRTP Act, being violative thereof, thus cannot be sustained and are turned down.
Bombay High Court Cites 87 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation vs Ahmedabad Green Belt Khedut Mandal on 9 May, 2014

44. In view of the above, Civil Appeal Nos.1542-44 of 2001, 1545-50 of 2001 and 1551-56 of 2001 are allowed. The judgment impugned therein are set aside to the extent hereinabove. Civil Appeal No.1864 of 2014 and Transferred Case (C) Nos.12-13 of 2010 are dismissed. However, it is clarified that any observation made herein in the transferred cases would not adversely affect either of the parties. No order as to costs.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 74 - Cited by 0 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & Anr vs Ahmedabad Green Belt Khedut Mandal & Ors on 9 May, 2014

44. In view of the above, Civil Appeal Nos.1542-44 of 2001, 1545-50 of 2001 and 1551-56 of 2001 are allowed. The judgment impugned therein are set aside to the extent hereinabove. Civil Appeal No.1864 of 2014 and Transferred Case (C) Nos.12-13 of 2010 are dismissed. However, it is clarified that any observation made herein in the transferred cases would not adversely affect either of the parties. No order as to costs.
Supreme Court of India Cites 71 - Cited by 53 - B S Chauhan - Full Document
1