Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.20 seconds)Section 9 in THE SURROGACY (REGULATION) ACT, 2021 [Entire Act]
Prabhu Dayal Sesma vs State Of Rajasthan & Anr on 28 August, 1986
In Zillurrahman Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra,5 the Supreme
Court upon relying on Prabhu Dayal Sesma (supra) and Eerati Laxman v.
State of Andhra Pradesh (supra) held that in calculating a person‟s age for
the purposes of statutory interpretation, the day of birth must be counted as a
whole day, and any specified age is deemed to be attained on the day
preceding the birthday anniversary. Consequently, a person whose age limit
is specified in a statute, is considered to have attained that age precisely on
the relevant date, and benefits or eligibility tied to age do not extend
automatically beyond that day. Para. 43 of the said decision reads as under:
Eerati Laxman vs State Of A.P on 23 January, 2009
In Zillurrahman Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra,5 the Supreme
Court upon relying on Prabhu Dayal Sesma (supra) and Eerati Laxman v.
State of Andhra Pradesh (supra) held that in calculating a person‟s age for
the purposes of statutory interpretation, the day of birth must be counted as a
whole day, and any specified age is deemed to be attained on the day
preceding the birthday anniversary. Consequently, a person whose age limit
is specified in a statute, is considered to have attained that age precisely on
the relevant date, and benefits or eligibility tied to age do not extend
automatically beyond that day. Para. 43 of the said decision reads as under:
Section 3 in THE SURROGACY (REGULATION) ACT, 2021 [Entire Act]
The Majority Act, 1875
Tarun Prasad Chatterjee vs Dinanath Sharma on 10 October, 2000
4. The petitioners, who appear in person places reliance on a decision of
the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in Rajitha P.V. & Anr. v.
Union of India & Ors.1 They submit that the Kerala High Court in the said
decision has considered the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of
Tarun Prasad Chatterjee v. Dinanath Sharma,2 and has held that the
eligibility of the intending male or female to avail the surrogacy service
extends throughout the 50th or 55th year as the case may be.
Zillurrahman Shaikh S/O. Abdul Rab ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 23 December, 2021
In Zillurrahman Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra,5 the Supreme
Court upon relying on Prabhu Dayal Sesma (supra) and Eerati Laxman v.
State of Andhra Pradesh (supra) held that in calculating a person‟s age for
the purposes of statutory interpretation, the day of birth must be counted as a
whole day, and any specified age is deemed to be attained on the day
preceding the birthday anniversary. Consequently, a person whose age limit
is specified in a statute, is considered to have attained that age precisely on
the relevant date, and benefits or eligibility tied to age do not extend
automatically beyond that day. Para. 43 of the said decision reads as under:
Section 9 in The General Clauses Act, 1897 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Indian Majority Act, 1875 [Entire Act]
1