Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.79 seconds)Section 7 in The Religious Endowments Act, 1863 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Religious Endowments Act, 1863 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in The Religious Endowments Act, 1863 [Entire Act]
Section 18 in The Religious Endowments Act, 1863 [Entire Act]
The Secretary Of State For India vs Bai Rajbai on 20 March, 1911
15. In 1818, as already stated, Ajmer was ceded to the British by Sindhia. From this it follows that the rights, which the inhabitants of that State enjoyed against its former rulers, availed them nothing against the British Government and could not be asserted in the Courts established by that Government except so far as they had been recognised by the new Sovereign Power. Recognition may be by legislation or by agreement express or implied. This well-established rule of law, for which reference may be made to Secretary of State for India v. Bai Rajbai. (1915) L.R. 42 I.A. 229, 237, S.C. 13 Bom.
The Religious Endowments Act, 1863
Vajesingji Joravarsingji Nayak vs The Secretary Of State For India on 26 June, 1924
L.R. 609 and Vajesingji Joravarsingji v. Secretary of State for India (1924) L.R. 51 I.A. 357, 360, S.C. 26 Bom. L.R. 1143 appears to their Lordships to be peculiarly applicable to an office, to which material benefits appertain and which, so far as the records show, had consistently been regarded as within the disposition of the Sovereign Power. Their Lordships think that this aspect of the matter has perhaps not received sufficient attention in the Courts of India.
1