Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.33 seconds)Canara Bank And Ors vs Shri Debasis Das And Ors on 12 March, 2003
27.1 In the decision of Canara Bank v. Debasis Das, AIR 2003 SC 2041, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the position in our country in administrative law is where no fundamental freedoms are involved, the courts/tribunals will only play a secondary role while the preliminary judgment as to reasonableness will remain with the executive or administrative authority.
Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961
Delhi Development Authority And Anr vs Uee Electrical Engg. (P) Ltd. And Anr on 19 March, 2004
6.5 Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DDA v. UEE Electricals Engg. (P) Ltd., (2004) 1 SCC 213 wherein it was observed that it is not that mala fides in the sense of improper motive, should be established only by direct evidence.
M/S Medley Minerals India Ltd vs State Of Orissa & Others on 17 September, 2004
6.6 Placing reliance on the decision in the case of Medley Minerals India Ltd v. State of Orissa, , it was contended that when the petitioner has led some foundation for the allegations of malafides, the impugned order should be struck down.
State Of Orissa vs Dr. (Miss) Binapani Dei & Ors on 7 February, 1967
6.7. Reliance was placed in the case of State of Orissa v. Binapani Dei to contend that it is open for the High Court in a given case to examine the disputed questions of fact.
Siemens Engineering & Manufacturing ... vs Union Of India & Anr on 30 April, 1976
6.8. Reliance was also placed in the case of Seimens Engg. & Mfg. Co. v. Union of India, to contend that quasi judicial order must be supported by reasons which is the basic principles of natural justice.
Lal Babu Hussein & Others vs Electrol Registration Officer & Others on 6 February, 1995
6.1 Reliance was placed in the case of Lal Babu Hussein v. Electoral Registration Officer, to contend that principles of natural justice require that adverse material must be made known to the person against whom the same is proposed to be used for the opportunity of being heard to be meaningful and purposive.
Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr vs The Chiief Election Commissioner, New ... on 2 December, 1977
6.9 Reliance was placed on the decision (Mohinder Singh v. Chief Election Commissioner) to contend that validity of an order passed by the statutory authority has to be examined by reasons so mentioned in the order and the reasons cannot be supplemented in the shape of affidavit or otherwise.
M. Sankaranarayanan Ias vs State Of Karnataka And Ors on 11 November, 1992
In the case of M. Shankaranarayanan, IAS v. State of Karnataka, , the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that it may not always be possible to demonstrate malice in fact with elaborate particulars and it may be permissible in an appropriate case to draw a reasonable inference of malafide from the facts pleaded and established. But such inference must be based on factual matrix and such factual matrix cannot remain in the realm of insinuation, surmise or conjecture. In the present case I find that from established facts, malafides can be safely inferred. I have no hesitation in concluding that the impugned order passed by respondent No. 1 is tainted on account of external pressure exerted on her. The exact effect and extent of damage that might have been done in the actual analysis is impossible to gauge. It is neither possible nor proper to judge what would have been the ultimate conclusion had this external pressure not been exerted on respondent No. 1.