Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (3.46 seconds)The West Bengal Land Development And Planning Act, 1948
Union Of India And Ors vs Filip Tiago De Gama Of Vedem Vasco De Gama on 30 November, 1989
In Union of India v. Filip Tiago De Gama, AIR
1990 SC 981, the issue was whether the amendment
would apply to an award made subsequent to
24.9.1984 even though the acquisition proceedings
had commenced prior to the date. This Court looked
at the intention behind giving retrospective effect to
the amending Section. If the literal interpretation is
taken, it was held, it will result in an anomaly. In
order to avoid it, regard must be had to the purpose
of Section 30(2). Consequently, this Court awarded
higher solatium even though the Reference Court
made the award in 1985.
Goura Venkata Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 19 November, 2003
)#Appeal (crl.) 506 of 1997#1997#State of Karnataka#Puttaraja#2003-11-27#25639#506#DORAISWAMY RAJU###
Appeal (crl.)#Appeal (crl.) 519-521 of 2003#2003#Goura Venkata Reddy Vs.#State of Andhra Pradesh#2003-11-19#25640#519-521#DORAISWAMY RAJU###
Appeal (crl.)#Appeal (crl.) 530-531 of 2003#2003#Bhargavan & Ors. #State of Kerala #2003-11-17#25641#530-531#DORAISWAMY RAJU###
Appeal (civil)#Appeal (civil) 7371 of 2002#2002#N.D. Thandani (Dead) By Lrs. #Arnavaz Rustom Printer & Anr. #2003-11-24#25642#7371#R.C. LAHOTI###
Appeal (civil)#Appeal (civil) 9205-07 of 2003#2003#The Land Acquisition Officer, Nizamabad, District, Andhra Pradesh #Nookala Rajamallu and Ors. #2003-11-21#25643#9205-07#DORAISWAMY RAJU###
Transfer Petition (crl.)#Transfer Petition (crl.) 77-78 of 2003#2003#K. Anbazhagan #The Superintendent of Police & ors.#2003-11-18#25644#77-78#S.N. VARIAVA###
Appeal (civil)#Appeal (civil) 7868 of 1995#1995#ITW Signode India Ltd. #Collector of Central Excise #2003-11-19#25645#7868#CJI###
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
K.S. Paripoornan vs State Of Kerala on 12 September, 1994
Again in K.S. Paripoornan's case [supra], this
Court widened the restricted interpretation given in
Raghubir Singh's case. It held that the enhanced
solatium would apply even to a case pending at the
time the Act came into force.