Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.45 seconds)
Bhanya Somaiah Died As Per Lrs vs The Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar, on 30 November, 2018 cites

Ramesh And Another vs Seth Gendalal Motilal Patni And Others on 6 January, 1966

In another judgment reported in Ramesh v. Patni14, the Hon'ble Apex Court expressed similar view, where the question was whether an order passed by the Claims Officer under the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Act, 1950 under Section 22(1) of the Act was questioned before the High Court on the ground that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to entertain or try the appeal, but High Court dismissed the petition, summarily holding that it was not final order and it did not decide the controversy between the parties and did not of its own force affect the rights of the parties or put an end to the controversy. Thereupon, the Apex Court observed as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 75 - M Hidayatullah - Full Document

Mothukuri Ranga Rao And Anr. vs Royyala Laxminarayana And Ors. on 11 December, 2007

Sri N.Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents, mainly urged that the revision is not amenable under Section 91 of the Act as the revision is maintainable against the final order, but review is not a final order. Therefore, the order passed by the Joint Collector is not amenable to jurisdiction of this Court under Section 91 of the Act, in view of the law laid down by this Court in "Yerraboth Sathiah v. Edla Chaliah2" "Kurva Mallamma v. Kupireddy Sasthri3" "Mothukuri Ranga Rao v. Royyala 1 (2015) 16 SCC 409 2 1960 (1) ALT 191 (S.B.) 3 2001 (1) ALT 382 6 MSM,J CRP_6787_2017 Laxminarayan4". He further contended that unless power is conferred on the authorities under the Act, they cannot exercise power of review, when the Section 89 (2) of the Act itself prescribed the procedure to be followed by interpreting section 89(2) of the Act.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 21 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1   2 Next