Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 28 (0.35 seconds)The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885
Section 164 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
The Special Economic Zones Act, 2005
Section 49 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
Section 68 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 1956
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Shiv Shankar on 1 February, 1971
"6. There is a presumption against repeal by implication, and
the reason of this rule is based on the theory that the legislature
while enacting a law has complete knowledge of the existing
laws on the same subject-matter, and therefore, when it does
not provide a repealing provision, the intention is clear not to
repeal the existing legislation. [See: Municipal Council, Palai
v. T.J. Joseph (AIR 1963 Sc 1561), Northern India Caterers (P)
Ltd. v. State of Punjab (AIR 1967 SC 1581), Municipal Corpn.
of Delhi v. Shiv Shanker [(1971) 1 SCC 442] and Ratan Lal
Adukia v. Union of India [(1989) 3 SCC 537]. When the new
Act contains a repealing section mentioning the Acts which it
expressly repeals, the presumption against implied repeal of
other laws is further strengthened on the principle of expressio
unius (personae vel rei) est exclusio alterius.