Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)K.Prabhakaran vs P.Jayarajan on 11 January, 2005
(i) In K. Prabhakaran v. P. Jayarajan, (2005) 1 SCC 754, it was held as
follows:
Modern School vs Union Of India & Ors on 27 April, 2004
In our view, the first sentence of the said passage quoted
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Modern School's case clearly indicates that the
principle stated in the said passage would apply only if the language used is capable of
bearing more than one construction. In our view, Note-III is incapable of any
construction except the one submitted by the respondent in view of its plain words and
effect. The passage quoted by the learned counsel for the appellant from the G.P.
Singh's Book and the above two judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court thus, do not
come to the aid of the appellant. Consequently, since the meaning of the note is clear
and unambiguous, the decisions relied upon by the petitioner in respect of the absurd
results cannot apply.
The Essential Commodities Act, 1955
The Companies Act, 1956
The Industries (Development And Regulation) Act, 1951
1