Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 54 (5.70 seconds)
Documents citing Amarnath Ashram Trust Society And Anr vs The Governor Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors on 3 December, 1997

Amarnath Saxena vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 November, 2025

7. The order dated 22.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 5137 of 2024 (Amarnath vs. State of U.P.) is reproduced as under:- "1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record. 2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No.0059 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 463, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Haraiyya, District Basti. 3.
Allahabad High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Pralhad Lokram Dodeja & Ors. vs The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. on 9 April, 2001

"The decision in Larsen and Toubro, which relied upon an earlier decision in Amarnath Ashram Trust Society v. Governor of U.P., (supra) to hold that a beneficiary has a right to beheard before a notification under Section 48(1) isissued, does not appear to be limited to acquisition for companies under Part Vll of the Act as is contended by the respondents although the acquisition in that case had been made for a company for the purpose of setting up a housing colony. Both cases have also drawn a distinction between the rights of an owner and the beneficiary of the acquisition to object to withdrawal from the acquisition for the reasons noted earlier."
Bombay High Court Cites 68 - Cited by 2 - H L Gokhale - Full Document

Shri Umed Higher Secondary School, ... vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors. on 29 April, 1999

32. Passing any order for collateral purpose amounts to colourable exercise of power and such an order would definitely be arbitrary and cannot be termed as bona fide. (Vide of Gujarat v. Suryakant Chunnilal Shah, (1999) 1 SCC 529; Amarnath Ashram Trust Society v. Governor of U.P., (1998) 1 SCC 591, Rule C. Sood v. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, (1998) 5 SCC 493: (1999 AIR SCW 168) and Rajendra Kumar Gupta v. State of U. P., (1997) 4 SCC 511.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 56 - Cited by 0 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

Narendra Road Lines Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of U.P. And Others on 2 July, 2010

He submits that in Amarnath Ashram Trust Society and another vs. Governor of U.P. and others (1998) 1 SCC 591, the Supreme Court found that where the entire cost of acquisition was to be born by the Society, merely because notifications stated that the land is needed for public purpose, it cannot be said that the acquisition was for public purpose and not under Chapter VII of the Act under the Land Acquisition (Companies) Rules, 1963.
Allahabad High Court Cites 89 - Cited by 7 - S Ambwani - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next