Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (0.29 seconds)
Qamber Jeevaji S/O Sk. Hatim Jeevaji vs The State Of Maharashtra on 18 June, 2010 cites

Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd vs Darius Shapur Chenai & Ors on 20 September, 2005

"178. If these materials are alone considered then one may be persuaded to accept the submission of Mr. Sachhar, the learned senior counsel appearing for the direct recruits - Writ Petitioners, that the Act in question was merely to declare the earlier decisions of this Court in Sehgal, (AIR 1991 SC 1406) (supra) and in Chopra, (1991 AIR SCW 1028) (supra) as invalid and as such is usurpation of the judicial power by the legislature. But it is a cardinal rule of interpretation that Objects and Reasons of a statute is to be looked into as an extrinsic aid to find out legislative intent only when the meaning of the statute by its ordinary ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:01:58 ::: 67 language is obscure or ambiguous. But if the words used in a statute are clear and unambiguous then the statute itself declares the intention of the legislature and in such a case it would not be permissible for a Court to interpret the Statute by examining the Object and Reasons for the Statute question".
Supreme Court of India Cites 36 - Cited by 542 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next