Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.36 seconds)
Dr.P.Pathmanathan vs Tmt.V.Monica cites

R. Subramaniam vs Commissioner Of Police on 7 October, 1963

25. In the aforesaid backdrop we may now turn to the issue of whether the Court of Magistrate acts as a criminal court while exercising powers under the Act and the Rules. It has already been pointed out that all the reliefs contemplated under Chapter IV are civil in nature. The term “criminal court” has not been defined under the Code. Section 6 sets out the classes of Criminal Courts, and the Court of a Magistrate is undoubtedly a Court falling within that class. However, it is well settled that to constitute a Criminal Court, it is not sufficient that it is one of the Courts mentioned under Section 6, Cr.P.C. It must also be acting as a Criminal Court. (See R. Subramanian v. Commissioner of Police, AIR 1964 Madras 185).
Madras High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

V.B. D'Monte vs Bandra Borough Municipality on 11 April, 1950

In V.B D’Monte v. Bandra Borough Municipal Corporation, AIR 1950 Bom 397, the question before the Full Bench of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court was whether a determination of the rate of tax by a Magistrate under the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act was revisable by the High Court on its criminal side. The Full Bench held that a Magistrate in dealing with rates and taxes was not dealing with any https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 24 criminal matter and hence was not an inferior Criminal Court. Holding that an order passed by a Sessions Judge exercising civil jurisdiction was amenable to a revision on the civil side of the High Court, Chief Justice Chagla opined as under:
Bombay High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 17 - V Bose - Full Document

Mammoo vs State Of Kerala And Anr. on 30 August, 1979

“The character of the proceeding, in our judgment, depends not upon the nature of the tribunal which is invested with authority to grant relief, but upon the nature of the right violated and the appropriate relief which may be claimed. A civil proceeding is, therefore, one in which a person seeks to enforce by appropriate relief the alleged infringement of his civil rights against another person or the State, and which if the claim is proved would result in the declaration express or implied of the right claimed and relief such as payment of debt, damages, compensation, delivery of specific property, enforcement of personal rights, determination of status https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ etc.” 27 The true test, therefore, depends on the character of the proceeding i.e., the nature of the right violated and the relief claimed thereon, and not the nature of the Tribunal adjudicating such a proceeding. Merely because a Magistrate is called upon to adjudicate and enforce civil rights in an application under Chapter IV of the D.V Act, it does not follow that the proceeding before it is of a criminal character. A Court of Magistrate not exercising functions or determining cases of a criminal character cannot be said to be a Criminal Court. (See also Mammoo v. State of Kerala, AIR 1980 Ker 18 (FB)).
Kerala High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 20 - Full Document

The Darcah Committee, Ajmer vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 April, 1961

In Dargah Committee, Ajmer v State of Rajasthan, AIR 1962 SC 574, the Ajmer Municipal Committee had issued a notice for recovery of tax, and had followed it up with an application before the Magistrate under Regulation 234 of the Ajmer-Merwara Municipalities Regulation. The Magistrate passed an order directing the payment of dues. This order was carried on appeal to the Sessions Judge, and then to the High Court by way of a revision all of which were unsuccessful. Dismissing the appeals the Hon’ble Supreme Court held:
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 35 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document

Mt. Mithan And Anr. vs Municipal Board Of Orai And State Of U.P. on 18 November, 1955

31.The fact that a Magistrate may, at a subsequent stage under Chapter V try an offence under Section 31 of the Act for breach of an order under Sections 18 or 23 of the Act does not render a proceeding under Chapter IV of the Act as one before a criminal court. A Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in, Mt Mithan v. Municipal Board of Oral and State of U.P., AIR 1956 All 351, has clarified this aspect and pointed out as under:
Allahabad High Court Cites 54 - Cited by 13 - Full Document

The Lokmanya Mills Ltd. vs The Municipal Borough Of Barsi on 8 March, 1939

“Various decisions were cited at the bar, and I shall briefly consider them. But as I shall point out these decisions were more concerned with deciding whether a matter lay in revision under s. 435 of the Criminal Procedure Code or under s. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code. In all these cases no special jurisdiction was conferred upon the High Court, and therefore the High Court had to determine the nature and extent of its revisional jurisdiction; and in order to determine that the learned Judges who decided those cases had to consider whether the applications lay under s. 435 of the Criminal Procedure Code or under s. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code. The decision which has been now accepted as laying down the correct principle and which had been followed in several decisions of this Court is to be found in Lokmanya Mills Ltd. v. Municipal Borough, Barsi. [(1939) 41 Bom. L.R. 937.] In that case the decision under s. 110 was given by the First Class Magistrate, Barsi, and a revision under s. 111 lay to the Sessions Court. The question then arose as to whether any revisional application lay from the decision of the Sessions Court, and Sir John Beaumont, sitting with Mr. Justice N.J. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Wadia, held that a revisional application lay under s. 115 35 of the Civil Procedure Code; and in coming to that conclusion the learned Chief Justice observed that “the question of liability to tax is a purely civil matter, and the Magistrate hearing an appeal against a demand notice is a criminal Court, so that an appeal lies from him to the Sessions Court, and not to the District Court, and revision lies from the Sessions Court to the High Court as a civil revisional application.
Bombay High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 16 - Full Document

Nevada Properties Pvt. Ltd. Through Its ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 24 September, 2019

When the nature of proceedings before the Magistrate under the D.V Act did not consciously engage the attention of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it cannot be said to be a part of the ratio thereby constituting a binding precedent under Article 141 of the Constitution of India, (See Nevada Properties Private Limited v State of Maharashtra, (2019) 20 SCC 119).
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 51 - S Khanna - Full Document

State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors on 21 November, 1990

“11. At the outset, a preliminary issue was raised as to whether the Revisional Jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution can be invoked against the orders of the Magistrate, passed under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. But the issue was settled by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604.
Supreme Court of India Cites 44 - Cited by 19733 - S R Pandian - Full Document
1   2 Next