Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 41 (1.12 seconds)Section 39 in The Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
Section 39 in Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
M/S Shenoy And Co. Represented By Its ... vs The Commercial Tax Officer , Circle 11 ... on 10 April, 1985
On the other hand, we respectfully
agree with the conclusion arrived at by the three Judge
Bench of this Court in Shenoy's case. In Shenoy the
Court was considering the applicability of Article 141
of the Constitution and its effect on cases, against
which no appeals had been filed. A law of the land
would govern everybody, and the non-consideration of
the principle of res judicata will not be a ground to
reconsider the said judgment.
Section 41 in The Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
The Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951
Authorised Officer (Land Reforms) vs M.M. Krishnamurthy Chetty[Overruled] on 5 November, 1996
Mr. Rao also strongly relied upon the
Judgment of this Court in the case of Authorised
Officer (Land Reforms) vs. M.M. Krishnamurthy
Chetty, 1998(9) SCC 138.
State Of U.P. And Anr vs M/S. Synthetics And Chemicals Ltd. And ... on 18 July, 1991
The next case relied upon is the case of State of U.P.
and another vs. Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. and
another (1991) 4 Supreme Court Cases, 139,.
Hon'ble Justice Sahai in his concurring judgment held
that a decision which is not expressed and is not
founded on reasons, nor it proceeded on consideration
of issue, cannot be deemed to be a law declared to have
binding effect as is contemplated by Article 141. The
learned Judge further observed that any declaration or
conclusion arrived at without application of mind or
proceeded without any reason cannot be deemed to be
declaration of law or authority of a general nature
binding as a precedent. We are afraid, that the
aforesaid observations cannot be held to be applicable
to the case in hand when before the Court the
constitutionality of the Act was directly under
consideration and, notwithstanding the concession of
the counsel appearing for the party, the Court
independently on examining the amendments in
question held the same to be constitutionally valid, and
further it went on to hold the period for which interim
payment would be payable.
M/S. A-One Granites vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 16 February, 2001
Mr. Rao then placed reliance on yet another decision of
this Court in the case of A-One Granites vs. State of
U.P. and Others (2001) 2 Supreme Court Cases 537,
to which one of us (Pattanaik, J.) was a party.