Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.30 seconds)
Dilip Singh & Ors. vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors. on 3 March, 2023 cites

Gullapalli Nageswara Rao And Others vs Andhra Pradesh State Road ... on 5 November, 1958

18. This Court in Rasid Javed v. State of U.P. [(2010) 7 SCC 781 : AIR 2010 SC 2275] following the judgment in Gullapalli Nageswara Rao [Gullapalli Nageswara Rao v. A.P. SRTC, AIR 1959 SC 308] , held that : (Rasid Javed case [(2010) 7 SCC 781 : AIR 2010 SC 2275] , SCC p. 796, para 51) "51. ... a person who hears must decide and that divided responsibility is destructive of the concept of judicial hearing is too fundamental a proposition to be doubted."
Supreme Court of India Cites 49 - Cited by 319 - Full Document

Rasid Javed & Ors vs State Of U.P. & Anr on 5 July, 2010

18. This Court in Rasid Javed v. State of U.P. [(2010) 7 SCC 781 : AIR 2010 SC 2275] following the judgment in Gullapalli Nageswara Rao [Gullapalli Nageswara Rao v. A.P. SRTC, AIR 1959 SC 308] , held that : (Rasid Javed case [(2010) 7 SCC 781 : AIR 2010 SC 2275] , SCC p. 796, para 51) "51. ... a person who hears must decide and that divided responsibility is destructive of the concept of judicial hearing is too fundamental a proposition to be doubted."
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 77 - Full Document

Automotive Tyre Manufactureres Assn vs The Designated Authority & Ors on 7 January, 2011

19. A similar view has been reiterated by this Court in Automotive Tyre Manufacturers Assn. v. Designated Authority [(2011) 2 SCC 258] , wherein this Court dealt with a case wherein the designated authority (DA) under the relevant statute passed the final order on the material collected by his predecessor-in-office who had also accorded the hearing to the parties concerned. This Court held that the order stood vitiated as it offended the basic principles of natural justice.
Supreme Court of India Cites 67 - Cited by 164 - D K Jain - Full Document

Kishan Chand vs Gaon Sabha, Bharthal And Ors. on 5 March, 2007

13. Learned senior counsel further relies upon the judgment in the case of Kishan Chand Vs Gaon Sabha, Bharthal and Others, reported as 2007 (4) 18 (Delhi) 133. By relying upon the said judgment, it is contended that under Rule 170 of the Delhi Land Reforms Rules, 1954, before finalising a demarcation, an objector must be given an opportunity to lead evidence. Thus, it is submitted that in the present case, the demarcation has been carried out without granting any hearing to the petitioners, which cannot be acted upon.
Delhi High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S Muralidhar - Full Document
1