Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 69 (1.08 seconds)
Documents citing M/S Gammon India Ltd vs Spl. Chief Secretary & Ors on 16 February, 2006

Shiv Charan And 3 Others vs Board Of Revenue And 3 Others on 27 February, 2024

23. Further, in the case of M/s Gammon India Ltd. versus Spl. Chief Secretary and Others reported in (2006) 3 SCC 354 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been please to observe that if the legislative intent to supersede the earlier law is manifested by the enactment of provisions as to affect such supersession, then it would amount to a repeal, notwithstanding the absence of the word 'repeal' in the later statute. In other words, the intention of the Legislature has to be inferred from the later statute to see if it proposed to preserve, modify, or completely obliterate the rights and liabilities attached to the earlier statute. This applies to both express as well as implied repeal. Thus, an analysis of the relevant authorities and case laws makes it clear that whenever an enactment is repealed and is accompanied by a simultaneous re-enactment, then the re-enacted statute is a reflection of a modified version of the earlier legislation, through express or implied repeal, as the case may be. Since Section 230 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 repeals enactments specified in the First Schedule thereof and the U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939 does not find place in the said First Schedule there is no express repeal nor the two enactments are shown to be irreconcilable so as to bring the former law within the sweep of implied repeal.
Allahabad High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next