Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 28 (0.35 seconds)The Punjab Excise Act, 1914
Section 22 in The Punjab Excise Act, 1914 [Entire Act]
Section 60 in The Punjab Excise Act, 1914 [Entire Act]
State Of Haryana And Ors vs Jage Ram And Ors on 21 April, 1980
To the same effect are the decisions of this Court in
State of Haryana & Ors. v. Jage Ram & Ors. and the State of
Punjab v. M/s Dial Chand & Gian Chand & Co. laying down that
persons who offer their bids at an auction to vend country
liquor with full knowledge of the terms and conditions
attaching thereto, cannot be permitted to wriggle out of the
contractual obligations arising out of the acceptance of
their bids by a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution.
Section 60 in The Punjab Excise Act, 1914 [Entire Act]
Section 59 in The Punjab Excise Act, 1914 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in The Punjab Excise Act, 1914 [Entire Act]
Shree Krishna Gyanoday Sugar Ltd. And ... vs The State Of Bihar And Anr. on 16 October, 1974
In M/s. Shree Krishna's case, supra, N.P. Singh, J.
speaking for the Court rightly observed that when the State
Government in exercise of its powers under s. 22 of the Act
grants the exclusive privilege of manufacturing, or
supplying or selling any intoxicant like liquor to an person
on certain condition, there comes into existence a contract
made in exercise of its statutory powers and such a
contract does not amount to a contract made by the State in
exercise of the executive powers.
K. P. Chowdhary vs State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors on 15 March, 1966
There is a distinction between contracts which are
executed in exercise of the executive powers and contracts
which are statutory in nature. Under Art. 299(1), three
conditions have to be satisfied before a binding contract by
the Union or the State in Exercise of the executive power
comes into existence :(1) The contract must be expressed to
be made by the President or the Governor, as the case may
be. (2) It must be executed in writing. And (3) The
execution thereof should be by such person and in such
manner as the President or the Governor may direct or
authorize. There can be no doubt that a contract which has
to be executed in accordance with Act. 299(1) is nullified
and becomes void if the contract is not executed in
conformity with provisions of Art. 299(1) and there is no
question of estoppel or ratification in such cases. Nor can
there be any implied contract between the Government and
another person: K.P. Choudhary v. State of M.P., Mulamchand
v. State of M.P., State of M.P. v. Ratfan Lal and State of
M.P. v. Firm Gobardhan Dass Kailash Nath.