LawMirror.com

Results of validity+of+document

Andriod Application iphone Application

Showing : 1001-1010 of 2207 Results

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, Section 10A, Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 -- Allotment of plot - Cancellation of - Validity - Held, Sarpanch has no jurisdiction to cancel 100 square yards plot allotted under Mahatama Gandhi Gramin Basti Yojna...........

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Section 3 -- Carving out new Gram Sabha area out of existing Gram Sabha area - Validity - Held, since only physical distance between existing Gram Sabha area(s) and proposed Gram Sabha area(s) is only by way of narrow streets running through villages, neither it is understandable nor it appeals to reason as to what object was going to be..........

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964, Rule 12 -- Panchayat land - Sale of - Validity - Resolution passed by Gram Panchayat does not mention purpose for which Gram Panchayat's land was proposed to be sold - Held, decision taken by Gram Panchayat to sell land in question is contrary to provisions of rules and lacks in foundation...........

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, Section 6, 10A - - Panchayat land - Sale to close family member of Sarpanch - Validity - Resolution passed by Gram Panchayat is devoid of purpose of sale and sale has been effected in favour of a very close family member of Sarpanch - Held, sale cannot stand the test of judicial scrutiny - Sale in favour of petitioner is..........

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138 -- Dishonour of cheque - Acquittal - Validity - Complaint filed beyond period of limitation - Held, dismissal of complaint justified - Acquittal proper - Appeal dismissed...........

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, Section 13, 16, Punjab Land Revenue Rules, 1908, Rule 15 - - Appointment of Lambardar - Objection as to availability of candidate - Failure of Collector to consider - Rectification thereof by Commissioner - Validity - Commissioner after holding that respondent No.6 would not be available in village rectified error by setting aside order..........

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Section 7, 8 -- Bifurcation of Gram Panchayat - Validity - Appellants challenged notification bifurcating their Gram Panchayat and creating a new Gram Panchayat out of it - Nothing on record on basis of which action of Govt. can be said to be mala fide - Even otherwise, Govt. has exercised power which is being legislative in character -..........

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 498A -- Cruelty - Conviction - Validity - Written dying declarations show that at the time of incident initially a slap was given by appellant `R' to the person of deceased and thereafter appellant `K' came from back side and after pouring kerosene set her ablaze - Parents of deceased categorically stated in their depositions that in life..........

DELHI HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Electricity Act, 2003, Section 135 -- Illegal abstraction of energy - Conviction - Validity - All witnesses stated that appellant was user of premises - No material on record to prove either in form of documentary evidence or from owner of premises who stated that he had sub-let premises to appellant or by examining any independent person of locality who states that..........

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2013
Details

Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, Section 17, Haryana Urban Development (Disposal of Land and Buildings) Regulations, 1978 - - Allotment of plot - Cancellation - Validity - Without considering fact that petitioner, who is a Class IV employee, had actually applied for extension of time within first 30 days of issue of allotment letter, respondent No.3 cancelled..........

Showing : 1001-1010 of 2207 Results