Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.29 seconds)
Keda Kalu Wagh Patil vs Devidas Pandharinath Metkar on 22 March, 1972 cites

Satyanarayan Laxminarayan Hegde And ... vs Millikarjun Bhavanappa Tirumale on 25 September, 1959

In support of his argument, he relied on the well known decision of the Supreme Court in Satyanarayan Laxminarayan Hedge v. Malikarjun Bhaavanappa Thirumale, and T.S. Balaram v. Volkart Bros., . With respect, the said decisions are applicable where two views are possible. In the present case, no two views are possible. The tenancy authorities have plainly misdirected themselves with regard to the scope of the amendment 32-F of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural lands Act, 1948, by Maharashtra Act XLIX of 1969, for enabling tenants to exercise the rights conferred on the tenants, as stated hereinabove.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 568 - Full Document

T. S. Balaram, Income Tax ... vs M/S. Volkart Brothers, Bombay on 5 August, 1971

In support of his argument, he relied on the well known decision of the Supreme Court in Satyanarayan Laxminarayan Hedge v. Malikarjun Bhaavanappa Thirumale, and T.S. Balaram v. Volkart Bros., . With respect, the said decisions are applicable where two views are possible. In the present case, no two views are possible. The tenancy authorities have plainly misdirected themselves with regard to the scope of the amendment 32-F of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural lands Act, 1948, by Maharashtra Act XLIX of 1969, for enabling tenants to exercise the rights conferred on the tenants, as stated hereinabove.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 841 - K S Hegde - Full Document
1