Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.36 seconds)

Shamanna Setty vs B.L. Channegowda on 14 July, 2006

3. The second contention vehemently urged by learned counsel for the petitioners that the order whereby the Commissioner was appointed by the Court below did not 3 authorize delegation of Commission powers to some other persons and therefore, the report submitted by the delegate is bad vide deligatus non protest protestas deligare, does not come to his aid since it is not a Thumb Rule, especially when the Commission work has been accomplished by the delegate who is none other than a Junior Engineer and in the opinion of this Court, he has competence to do commission work; secondly, this Maxim lays down a general principle and therefore, not in the absence of proven prejudice; the reliance placed by the petitioners on Shamanna Setty Vs. B.L. Channegowda, ILR 2006 KAR 3588 does not come much to his aid since this aspect has not been discussed.
Karnataka High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 6 - K L Manjunath - Full Document
1