Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.66 seconds)Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997
The Special Courts Act, 1979
The Limitation Act, 1963
Section 4 in Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 24 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Dalchand vs Municipal Corporation, Bhopal And Anr. on 11 June, 1982
15. It is also relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in the case of Dalchand Vs. Municipal Corporation, Bhopal and
another reported in AIR 1983 SC 303, wherein it is held that there are no ready
tests or invariable formulae to determine whether a provision is mandatory or
directory. The broad purpose of the statute is important. The object of the
particular provision must be considered. The link between the two is most
important. The weighing of the consequence of holding a provision to be
mandatory or directory is vital and, more often that not, determinative of the very
question whether the provision is mandatory or directory.