Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.25 seconds)

Hansraj Gupta vs The Official Liquidators, Dehra-Dun ... on 16 December, 1932

In the case of Hansraj Gupta v. Dehra Dun-Mussoorie Electric Tramway Co. Ltd. [AIR 1933 PC 63 : (1932-33) 60 IA 13] the Privy Council was required to interpret the words "money due" under Section 186 of the Companies Act, 1913. Section 186 dealt with the recovery of any money due to the company from a contributory. Interpreting the words "money due", the Privy Council said that the phrase would only refer to those claims which were not time-barred.
Bombay High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 79 - Full Document

New Delhi Municipal Committee vs Kalu Ram & Anr on 20 April, 1976

In the case of New Delhi Municipal Committee v. Kalu Ram [(1976) 3 SCC 407] relying on the Privy Council decision in Hansraj Gupta v. Dehra Dun-Mussoorie Electric Tramway Co. Ltd. [AIR 1933 PC 63 : (1932-33) 60 IA 13] this Court interpreted Section 7 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1958 in a similar way. Under that section where any person is in arrears of rent payable in respect of any public premises, the Estate Officer may, by order, require that person to pay the same within such time and in such instalments as may be specified in the order. While considering the meaning of the words "arrears of rent payable" this Court examined whether Section 7 creates a right to realise arrears of rent without any limitation of time. The Court observed that the word "payable" is somewhat indefinite in import and its meaning must be gathered from the context in which it occurs. In the context of recovery of arrears of rent under Section 7, this Court said that if the recovery is barred by the law of limitation, it is difficult to hold that the Estate Officer could still insist that the said amount was payable. When a duty is cast on an authority to determine the arrears of rent the determination must be in accordance with law. Section 7 only covers arrears not otherwise time-barred.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 97 - A C Gupta - Full Document

State Of Kerala & Ors vs V.R.Kalliyanikutty & Anr on 1 April, 1999

30. As far as the finding in V.R. Kalliyanikutty (supra) regarding Section 70(3) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, which provides for a suit by the debtor for refund after payment under protest, is concerned, what is to be noted is that the defence for the State Financial Corporations that the State Financial Corporations Act conferred an additional right to recover amounts due would still be applicable. Therefore, the existence of the right to the debtor under Section 70(3) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act cannot be said to be determinative of the issue."
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 144 - S V Manohar - Full Document
1   2 Next