It was held in the case as under : Bangalore Development Authority[15] to NRI Legal Services show that this Court had already NRI Legal Services expressed its concern about the lackadaisical manner in which the land is acquired by the State Government in favour of the Bangalore Development Authority for housing scheme in the metropolitan area without conducting proper enquiry about the need NRI Legal Services of the residents of the area and plights of the land owners. The doctrine of unjust enrichment NRI Legal Services is NRI Legal Services a NRI Legal Services just NRI Legal Services and salutary doctrine.
” Similar inconvenience may easily be supposed to have befallen the petitioners and others of their class and the immediate and possibly adverse impact of the impugned Acts on their occupation or business must, therefore, be taken into account as one Of the important factors in judging the reasonableness or otherwise of the said Acts. On the other hand, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, Mr. For the purpose of invoking Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code, no amount of evidence can be looked into.
In other words, he cannot collect the duty from his purchaser at one end and also collect the same duty from the State on the ground that it has been collected from him contrary to law. Pradeep Sancheti contend that Article 91(a) of the Limitation Act is not applicable to the facts of the instant case as it is applicable only to specific movable property and that bonds are not specific movable property but chose in action. Chose in action is not a thing and is not capable of being possessed.
Although they carry on the business only with the aid of permits, which are granted to them by the authorities under the Motor Vehicles Act, no compensation has been allowed to them under the Statute. The principles of res judicata, when attracted, would bar another suit in view of Section 12 of the Code. The issues on merit of the matter which may arise between the parties would not be within the realm of the court at that stage. We may forewarn that these propositions are set out merely for the sake of convenient reference and are not supposed to be exhaustive.
Act, 1947 (Orissa Act XIV of 1947), as applied to Orissa States, the Government of Orissa are pleased to 68 534 appoint the 31st March, 1949, as the date with effect from which every dealer whose gross turnover during the year ending the 31st March, 1949, exceeded Rs. Hundreds of citizens are earning their livelihood by carrying on this business on various routes within the State of Uttar Pradesh.
” In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Orissa Sales Tax. (2) Certiorari will NRI Legal Services also be issued when the Court or Tribunal acts illegally in the exercise of its undoubted jurisdiction, as when it decides without giving an opportunity to the parties to be heard, or violates the principles of natural justice. The discussion in the judgment yields the following propositions. No person can seek to collect the duty from both ends.
5,000 shall be liable to pay tax under the said Act on sales effected after the said NRI Legal Services date “. The power of the Court is not meant to be exercised for unjustly enriching a person. The learned senior counsel placed reliance on the case of Standard Chartered Bank v. Hemantika Wahi, learned counsel appearing for the State, supported the plea of the prosecutrix. The doctrine of unjust enrichment is, however, inapplicable to the State. Reconstruction of plot under Section 49 clause (viii) of the Act, is confined only for the limited purpose of buildings, roads, drains, sewage, sewage lines and other similar amenities.
In case of any doubt or ambiguity in these propositions, reference must be had to the discussion and propositions in the body of the judgment. All issues shall not be the subject-matter of an order under the said provision. The Indian legislature endeavor in detail by the Limitation Act to state in the third column of the Schedule, the event which is to be taken as completing a cause of action that is the date from the time begins to run. Reliance was also placed by the learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellants, on the decision of this Court in the case of Bondu Ramaswamy v.
After so stating, while proceeding to deal with the concept of resjudicata, the Court opined:- 23. Her submission was that once the charge under Section 376 IPC has been added which was a serious charge and the offence being non-bailable, the proper course of action was to direct the appellant to surrender before the trial court and apply for regular bail. No one can speak of the people being unjustly enriched.
Her submission was that having regard to the seriousness of this charge, it was not a case of anticipatory bail. The question involving a mixed question of law and fact which may require not only examination of the plaint but also other evidence and the order passed in the earlier suit may be taken up either as a preliminary issue or at the final hearing, but, the said question cannot be determined at that stage.
State represents the people of the country.