Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 31 (1.00 seconds)Section 3 in Madras Estates Land Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in Madras Estates Land Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
Dr. K. A. Dhairyawan And Others vs J. R. Thakur And Others on 28 April, 1958
With respect, I may state that it appears to me that it will be difficult to reconcile the principle thus enunciated with the reasoning of the decision of the Supreme Court in Dr. K.A. Dhairyawan v. J.R. Thakur , cited above. Under the Bombay Rent Act premises besides meaning any land not being used for agricultural purposes means also any building or part of a building let separately, and their Lordships of the Supreme Court held that the tenant who had put up the building with a covenant to yield up the building to the landlord at the end of the term, would have the immunity of the Rent Act in respect of the land after the expiry of the term, but, that would not extend to the building. He was never a lessee of the building.
J.H. Irani And Ors. vs T.S. Pl. P. Chidambaran Chettiar And ... on 27 July, 1951
14. In my view, the definition of building under the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act and the case law with reference to that definition cannot be imported while considering the context of the word building under Section 18 of the Abolition Act. As observed by Raghava Rao, J., in Irani V. Chidambaram Chettiar (1952) 2 M..L.J. 221, in the absence of a statutory definition the expression building has to be construed with reference to the context of the particular enactment. The case law in regard to what is conveyed by the word building the subject of examination in the said decision cannot be of much assistance in the present case. I will be echoing only what has been repeatedly laid down when I state that no real help can be gained as to the meaning of a word in one statute by reference to its meaning in other statutes, particularly if they are all special statutes.
Section 42 in Madras Estates Land Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 187 in Madras Estates Land Act, 1908 [Entire Act]
S. Rengaraja Iyengar And Anr. vs Achikannu Ammal And Anr. on 3 March, 1959
This naturally makes all the difference, a difference which has been noticed by Subrahmanyam, J., in Rengaraja Iyengar v. Achikannu Ammal . The learned Judge Veeraswami, J.,. observes: