Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 30 (1.10 seconds)
V.M. Syed Mohamed And Co. And Anr. vs The State Of Madras Represented By The ... on 29 August, 1952
cites
Section 5 in Government of India Act, 1935 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in Government of India Act, 1935 [Entire Act]
Government of India Act, 1935
Section 2 in Government of India Act, 1935 [Entire Act]
Chiranjit Lal Chowdhuri vs The Union Of India And Others on 4 December, 1950
In --'Charanjit Lal Chowdhury v. The Union of India', 1951 S.C.J. 29, Fazl Ali J. observed: "Now the petitioner has made no attempt to discharge the burden of proof to which I have referred and we are merely asked to presume that there must be other companies also which would be open to the charge of mismanagement and negligence".
The State Of Bombay And Another vs F.N. Balsara on 25 May, 1951
"The principle of equal protection does not take away from the State the power of classifying ersons for legitimate purpose. ..... While reasonable classification is permissible such classification must be based upon some real and substantial distinction bearing a reasonable and just relation to the object sought to be attained and the classification cannot be made arbitrarily and without any substantial basis." Per Fazl Ali, J. in -- 'State of Bombay v. P. N. Balsara', 1951 S.C.J. 478. (3) A classification cannot be upheld on purely fanciful grounds.
Section 133 in The Customs Act, 1962 [Entire Act]
The State Of West Bengal vs Anwar Ali Sarkar on 11 January, 1952
29. Considerable reliance was placed for the petitioners on the decision of the Supreme Court in -- 'State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar', (1952 S. C. J. 55) in which it was decided by a majority that Section 5 (1) of the West Bengal Special Courts Act X of 1950 was void as bemg repugnant to Article 14. Under tbat section, power was conferred on the Government to constitute special Courts and to direct sucn onences or classes of offences or cases or classes of cases as the Government mignt order in writing, to bo tried by such Courts. The procedure presonoed for the trial of cases before the Special Courts was different Irom that which is prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Code. The question was wnether the power conferred on the Government under Section 5 (1) was discriminatory and opposed to Article 14. It was held tnat it was.