Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.68 seconds)The Limitation Act, 1963
Section 14 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 127 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
State Of Goa vs M/S. Western Builders on 5 July, 2006
From the above, it is evident that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of State of Goa Vs. Western Builders, reported in JT 2001 (8) SC 271,
made it clear that the policy of Section 14 is to afford protection to a
Page 10 of 15
W.P.(C) No. 12128 of 2016
// 11 //
litigant against the bar of limitation when he institutes a proceeding
which, by reason of some technical defect, cannot be decided on merit.
Section 126 in The Electricity Act, 2003 [Entire Act]
Narayan Chandra Kundu vs State Of West Bengal And Ors. on 7 August, 2007
It
has been held in the case of Narayan Chandra Kundu Vs. State of West
Bengal and others, reported in AIR 2007 Cal 298 that "....After going
through the provisions contained in Sections 126 and 135 of the Act we
find that the legislature has intended that the Assessing Officer must be a
person who was actually a member of the inspection team at the time of
detecting the pilferage or the unauthorised use of the electricity so that he
can pass the order of assessment not on the basis of papers placed before
him but after actually visiting the site at the time of detection of the
illegality....." In the case of Sri Seetaram Rice Mill (supra), it is held in
paragraph-23 that Section 126 of the Act contemplates the steps to be
taken, which include 'the Assessing Officer is to conduct inspection of the
place or premises and the equipments, gadgets, machines, devices found
connected or used in such place.' (emphasis supplied).