Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.48 seconds)
Documents citing T.A. Mahomed Usman vs State Of Madras Represented By Secy. To ... on 17 November, 1959

Acit, New Delhi vs Juhi Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd.,, New ... on 26 May, 2017

43. In the Law Lexicon by P. Ramanatha Aiyar, meaning of Voluntary has been given as, to quote Voluntary - Of one's free will, impulse of choice; not constringed by another; acting voluntarily or willingly [S 2(2), Sale of Goods ActJ; [Art. 101 (3), prov., Const.] Voluntary-The expression 'voluntary is used in this section to some states have adopted at different times. T.E. Mohomed Usman v. State of Madras, AIR 1961 Mad 129, 138.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Izhar Ahmad Khan vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 16 February, 1962

67. The question of validity of Rule 3 of Schedule III of the Citizenship Act came up for consideration before several High Courts in India. The High Court of Madras is Mohomed Usman v. State of Madras and the Rajasthan High Court in Ghaural Hasan v. State of Rajasthan (A.I.R. (1951) Raj. 173), held the Rule to be valid; while the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Mohd. Khan v. Govt. Andhra Pradesh (A.I.R. (1957) Andh.
Supreme Court of India Cites 37 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Trivium Power Engineers Pvt. Ltd., New ... vs Assessee on 11 December, 2009

"Voluntary - Of one's free will, impulse of choice; not constringed by another; acting voluntarily or willingly [S. 2(2), Sale of Goods Act]; [Art. 101(3), prov., Const.] Voluntary - The expression `voluntary' is used in this section to mean `naturalisation' in the narrow sense of that term and excluding compulsory, involuntary of collective naturalization which some states have adopted at different times. T.E. Mohomed Usman vs. State of Madras, AIR 18 1961 Mad 129, 138. [Citizenship Act, 1955, S. 9(1)] "Means doing of something as the result of the free exercise of the will but not something done under a legal duty."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sanjay Enterprises Pvt Ltd, vs Assessee

"Voluntary - Of one's free will, impulse of choice; not constringed by another; acting voluntarily or willingly [S. 2(2), Sale of Goods Act]; [Art. 101(3), prov., Const.] Voluntary - The expression `voluntary' is used in this section to mean `naturalisation' in the narrow sense of that term and 16 ITA no. 3036&4083/Del/07 excluding compulsory, involuntary of collective naturalization which some states have adopted at different times. T.E. Mohomed Usman vs. State of Madras, AIR 1961 Mad 129, 138. [Citizenship Act, 1955,S. 9(1)] "Means doing of something as the result of the free exercise of the will but not something done under a legal duty."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Jai Inder Singh, Delhi vs Assessee on 14 June, 2010

"Voluntary - Of one's free will, impulse of choice; not constringed by another; acting voluntarily or willingly [S. 2(2), Sale of Goods Act]; [Art. 101(3), prov., Const.] Voluntary - The expression `voluntary' is used in this section to mean `naturalisation' in the narrow sense of that term and excluding compulsory, involuntary of collective naturalization which some states have adopted at different times. T.E. Mohomed Usman vs. State of Madras, AIR 1961 Mad 129, 138. [Citizenship Act, 1955,S. 9(1)] "Means doing of something as the result of the free exercise of the will but not something done under a legal duty."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 44 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Robin Chemicals (P) Ltd. vs Government Of Tamil Nadu And Two Ors. on 26 July, 1996

It is actually a case of a party to the dispute who lost his opportunity to remedy the breach through his own default and it is not open to him to complain that he has been the victim of procedural impropriety of natural justice that has been denied to him vide A1 Mehdawi v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, 1990 1 A.C.876. Further, the plea that the petitioner was not afforded or given yet another opportunity before passing of the final order of cancellation would not render the order void, when sufficient opportunities were given earlier.
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Abdul Aleem vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 11 September, 1962

7. There is a long line of authority in support of this view. It was ruled by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Mahomed Usman v. State of Madras, that for the purpose of enabling the Government to pass an order under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act it was not the status of the individual when he entered India that should be taken into account but his status on the date when the order was passed or direction issued.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 12 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1