Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.81 seconds)

Chatter Singh Baid And Ors. vs Corporation Of Calcutta And Ors. on 1 June, 1983

It will be seen that clause (d) aforesaid was in similar terms as clause (e) of Section 406(2) as it originally existed. Bombay High Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 217 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. Calcutta High Court in Chhatter Singh Baid & Ors. vs. Corporation of Calcutta & Ors. [AIR 1984 Cal. 283] also took the same view. There it was sub-section (3A) of Section 183 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951 which provided No appeal under this section shall be entertained unless the consolidated rate payable up to the date of presentation of the appeal on the valuation determined
Calcutta High Court Cites 43 - Cited by 17 - Full Document

Shyam Kishore And Others vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi And ... on 3 September, 1992

A Full Bench of the Delhi High Court, by majority, upheld the constitutional validity of the aforesaid provision though there was also challenge to the same based on Article 14 of the Constitution. Appeal against the judgment of the Delhi High Court was taken to this Court which upheld the view of the Delhi High Court. The decision of this Court is reported as Shyam Kishore and Ors. vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr. [(1993) 1 SCC 22].
Supreme Court of India Cites 44 - Cited by 421 - Y Dayal - Full Document

Elora Construction Company vs The Municipal Corporation Of Gr. Bombay ... on 22 February, 1979

In M/s. Elora Construction Company vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay & Ors. [AIR 1980 Bom.162], the question before the Bombay High Court was as to the validity of Section 217 of the Bombay Municipal Corporations Act. This Section provided for filing of appeal against any rateable value or tax fixed or charged under that Act but no such appeal could be entertained unless :
Bombay High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 23 - Full Document
1   2 Next