Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904

11 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

SUDAM SHANKAR KSHIRSAGAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2010 INSC 55530 August 2010Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act to acquire agricultural land belonging to a Hindu joint family under the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1986. The appellants challenged the acquisition, contending that each coparcener's share should

GOVINDA BALA PATIL (D) BY LRS.versusGANPATI RAMCHANDRA NAIKWADE (D) BY LRS.

2013 INSC 49929 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The tenant filed a proceeding under s.32G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 seeking a price determination of land he claimed to have purchased. The Additional Tahsildar held the land was leased for sugarcane and dismissed the case, but the Sub‑Divisional Officer on appeal reversed that finding, sta

JAYANTBHAI MANUBHAI PATEL AND OTHERSversusARUN SUBODHBHAI MEHTA AND OTHERS

1989 INSC 9928 March 1989Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the election of a Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation. The incumbent Mayor and Deputy Mayor issued a notice for a meeting on 1 June 1988, but the Mayor later cancelled the notice and directed a postponement, after which a minority of councillors met and elected new officers.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI THROUGH COMMISSIONERversusANIL SHANTARAM KHOJE & ORS.

2014 INSC 15528 February 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Mumbai Municipal Corporation amended its promotion rules for Deputy Municipal Commissioner through Resolutions approved by the State Government, but the rules were not published in the Official Gazette until 28‑April‑2011. The petitioners, Assistant Municipal Commissioners, sought promotion under the amended rules,

BHARAT GENERAL & TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD. & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1988 INSC 28919 September 1988Dismissed

The petitioners, manufacturers of washed cottonseed oil, challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 41 and 41A of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, alleging that the State of Maharashtra’s power to grant tax exemptions to new units in backward areas and to withdraw those exemptions for edible‑oil units only was arbitra

PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING P. LTD.versusGROCERY MARKET & SHOPS BOARD & ORS.

2016 INSC 16112 February 2016Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Maharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and Other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1969 and the Grocery Markets or Shops Unprotected Workers Scheme, 1970 could be applied to Pepsico India Holding Ltd., which manufactures petro‑chemical products, soft drinks and bottle

RAMAN LAL BHAI LALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2008 INSC 1445 February 2008Case Allowed

Five couples entered into an agreement to jointly purchase about 172 acres of agricultural land in Gujarat, solely to simplify negotiations and later divide the land among themselves, with no intention of joint cultivation. After purchase they partitioned the land and obtained separate mutation entries. The Mamlatdar h

THE DHARANGADRA CHEMICAL WORKSversusDHARANGADHRA MUNICIPALITY & ANOTHER

1985 INSC 1923 September 1985Dismissed

The appellant, Dharangadhra Chemicals, challenged the levy of octroi duty at an enhanced rate imposed by Dharangadhra Municipality under its Octroi Rules and Bye‑laws of 1965. The dispute centered on whether the municipal rules could be brought into force without a statutory exemption from the Saurashtra Terminal Tax a

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusSANTOSH SHANKAR ACHARYA

2000 INSC 3691 August 2000Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra detained Santosh Shankar Acharya under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981, but failed to inform him that he could make a representation to the detaining authority. The High Court held that such non‑communication violated Article 22(5) of the Constitutio

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search