Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.28 seconds)
Behramshaw Hormanshah Bharda And Ors. vs Dastoorji Hormasdyar Kayoji Mirza And ... on 13 July, 1979
cites
Article 26 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 25 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 132 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
State Of Jammu & Kashmir And Others vs Thakur Ganga Singh And Another on 26 November, 1959
11. Our attention has not been drawn to any other decisions of the Supreme Court directly an the point regarding Arts. 25 and 26 of the Constitution. Therefore, it cannot be said, as was observed in State of J. and K. v. Thakur Ganga Singh (supra) and in Bhagwan Swarup v. State of Maharashtra (supra), that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court authoritatively pronouncing the law there cannot be said to be any substantial question of law as to the interpretation of this particular aspect of the Constitution.
Raja Ganga Pratap Singh vs The Allahabad Bank Ltd., Lucknow on 22 January, 1957
12. The other condition of Article 228 is that determination of this substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution must be necessary for the disposal of the case before the trial Court. Now the words "necessary for the disposal of the case" have also been interpreted by the Supreme Court in R4ja Ganga Pratap Singh v. Allaliabad Bank Ltd., Lucknow (supra). The question of the validity was raised and pressed by one of the parties to the suit and hence it had to be decided by the High Court. Without & decision On that question, the case could not have been disposed of. That is how the Supreme Court, while considering the question whether it was necessary for the disposal of the case to decide the question before it, interpreted the words of Art. 228 and applied them to the facts of the case. In the instant case before us also, the question of the validity Of the custom alleged by the plaintiffs in the suit is put into the issue and certain doubts have been raised by the defendants in the suit and therefore, these contentions have to be decided by the Court. Without a decision of that question, the can cannot be disposed of and therefore, to use the language of Article 228, the determination of the question regarding the validity of the custom is necessary for the disposal of the case.