Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 43 (0.37 seconds)The State Of Rajasthan vs Mst. Vidhyawati And Another on 2 February, 1962
In State of Rajasthan v. Mst. Vidhyawati, this question again came up for consideration. Sinha C.J., delivering the judgment on behalf of the court, traced the history of the present, Article 300 with reference to prior constitutional provisions and dealt with the question regarding the extent of liability of the State Government for tort in respect of the tortious acts committed by its servants. The facts of that case were that a jeep supplied by the State to the Collector when driven back from the repair shop to the Collector's office met with an accident and the question arose whether the driver of the vehicle while returning back four the workshop, was doing any act in connection with the exercise of sovereign power of the State. Their Lordships held that the State is liable for the damages occasioned and that no protection could be claimed by the State.
The Revenue Recovery Act, 1890
Income Tax Rules, 1962
Section 65 in Government of India Act, 1935 [Entire Act]
Article 300 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Government of India Act, 1935
Section 32 in Government of India Act, 1935 [Entire Act]
The Secretary Of State For India In ... vs Hari Bhanji And Anr. on 28 April, 1882
24. The learned Chief Justice referred to a number of cases relating to acts of State and ultimately referred to Secretary of State v. Hari Bhanji and stated that the head-note in that case correctly brought out the effect of the judgment.
H. H. Maharajadhiraja Madhav Rao Jiwaji ... vs Union Of India on 15 December, 1970
An observation in the judgment of the Supreme Court in Madhav Rao Scindia v. Union of India, is significant :