Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 44 (0.40 seconds)

Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia vs Shri Justice S. R. Tendolkar & ... on 28 March, 1958

"11. The decisions clearly lay down that though Article 14 forbids class legislation, it does not forbid reasonable classification for the purpose of legislation. In order, however, to pass the test of permissible classification, two conditions must be fulfilled viz. (i) that the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from those that are left out of the group; and (ii) that that differentia must have a rational relation to the objects sought to be achieved by the statute in question (see Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Justice S.R. Tendolkar [AIR 1958 SC 538 : 1959 SCR 279, 296 : 1959 SCJ 147] ). The classification may be founded on differential basis according to objects sought to be achieved but what is implicit in it is that there ought to be a nexus i.e. causal connection between the basis of classification and object of the statute under consideration. It is equally well settled by the decisions of this Court that Article 14 condemns discrimination not only by a substantive law but also by a law of procedure."
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 1003 - Full Document

M/S. Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd vs Union Of India And Anr on 28 April, 2004

9. We have considered the judgment rendered in Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Anr. (supra), reliance upon which has been placed by learned counsel for the respondents, and found therefrom that the appellant, a company registered under Indian Companies Act having its registered office at Mumbai, got a loan from the State Bank of India, Bhopal Branch. Respondent no. 2 therein issued a notice for repayment of said loan from Bhopal purported to be in terms of provisions of Securities and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act, 2002'). Questioning the vires of the said Act, a writ petition was filed before the Delhi High Court by the appellant, which was dismissed on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 856 - S B Sinha - Full Document

S.M.D. Kiran Pasha vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors on 9 November, 1989

The reference of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in S.M.D. Kiran Pasha Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. (supra), reliance upon which has been placed by learned counsel for the petitioners, is also required to be made wherein it has been laid down as under paragraph 14 that the right to life and personal liberty has been guaranteed as a fundamental right and for its enforcement one could resort to Article 226 of the Constitution for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction. Answering the question that precisely at what stage resort to Article 226 has been envisaged in the 25 Constitution, it has been held that when a right is so guaranteed, it has to be understood in relation to its orbit and its infringement. Conferring the right to life and liberty imposes a corresponding duty on the rest of the society, including the State, to observe that right, that is to say, not to act or do anything which would amount to infringement of that right, except in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. In other words, conferring the right on a citizen involves the compulsion on the rest of the society, including the State, not to infringe that right.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 117 - K N Saikia - Full Document

The State Of West Bengal vs Anwar Ali Sarkar on 11 January, 1952

In the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar (supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that to pass the test, two conditions must be fulfilled, namely, (1) that the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes those that are grouped together from others; and (2) that differentia must have a rationale relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Act. Thus, the differentia which is the basis of the classification and the object of 62 the Act are distinct things and what is necessary is that there must be a nexus between them. The test must be reasonable and not the arbitrary and irrational.
Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 600 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next