cover image: The Calcutta Weekly Notes  October 20  1950

Premium

20.500.12592/mq8jt7

The Calcutta Weekly Notes October 20 1950

1950

893 the Judicial Committee explained the docrine of the writ of certiorari and held that the construction of the words reasonable cause to believe " in Limsidge's case 1942 A. C. '206 did not lay down any general rule as to the constrution of such phrases when they occur in the statutory enactments. [...] N. 445 it was pointed out that the right of superintenence which the High Court has under the Constitution is practically the right which the high Court had under the Government of India Act 1919. [...] In view of the nature of the order passed the Federal Court in (1950) S. C. R. 166 held that the order appealed against was not a final order and the appeal filed against the High Court judgment was held to be incopetent. [...] In Union of India v. Hira Debi 54 C. W. N. 840 it was held that in a proper case a Receiver can be appointed by way of equitablexecution in respect of money standing to the credit of a subscriber to a provident fund and Dominion of India v. Ashutosh 54 C. W. N. 254 was dissented from. [...] In Lalit Kumar v. The State Santary Inspector 54 C. W. N. 909 it was held that the Criminal Court had jurisdition to consider the validity of an order cancelling a licence only where the order of the statutory body was entirely without jurisdictioth In King v. Tobarak 54 C. W. N 8 sec.
law
Pages
6
Published in
India
SARF Document ID
sarf.100104
Segment Pages Author Actions
The Calcutta Weekly Notes October 20 1950
clxxi-clxxvi unknown view

Related Topics

All