Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949

12 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

TANAJI RAMCHANDRA NIMHANversusSWATI VINAYAK NIMHAN AND ORS

2006 INSC 5131 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

In a municipal corporation election, the petitioner alleged irregularities in the counting process, including failure to show ballot papers before bundling, improper identification of invalid votes, and that a prize announced for the returning officer caused haste. The Small Causes Court ordered a recount, which the Hi

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.

KISHANSING TOMARversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF AHMEDABAD AND ORS.

2006 INSC 71319 October 2006Disposed off

The Chairman of the Standing Committee of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) feared a delay in elections to the new municipal body whose term was due to expire on 15 October 2005, and filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State Election Commission and the State Government to hold elections before th

AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusGTL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. & ORS. ETC.

2016 INSC 115316 December 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Gujarat's municipal tax provisions could levy a tax on mobile telephone towers. The petitioners (Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation) argued that mobile towers are not "land or building" under Entry 49 of List II of the Seventh Schedule, rendering the tax ultra‑violet. The Court interpret

HINSA VIRODHAK SANGHversusMIRZAPUR MOTI KURESH JAMAT & ORS.

2008 INSC 36614 March 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Hinsa Virodhak Sangh and associated butchers, challenged two resolutions of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation that ordered the closure of municipal slaughter houses for nine days during the Jain Paryushan festival, alleging violations of their fundamental rights to trade (Art. 19(1)(g)), equality (Art

SHRI GIRISH VYAS & ANR. .versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2011 INSC 75612 October 2011Disposed off

The case concerned a 3,450‑sq‑metre plot (FP No.110) in Pune that was originally reserved for a garden and later for a primary school under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act). After the land was acquired, the developer, who was the son‑in‑law of the then Chief Minister, obtained a developme

THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION FOR CITY OF PUNE AND ANR.versusBHARAT FORGE CO. LTD. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 18110 March 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Municipal Corporation of Pune collected octroi duties from the Poona Cantonment under a 1963 schedule of octroi rules, which the respondents challenged as illegal. The Supreme Court examined whether the 1881 Government Notification authorising octroi collection allowed rates and articles to be varied over time, and

MOHANLAL NANABHAI CHOKSI (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2010 INSC 6684 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land in Surat, challenged the acquisition of their property for a vegetable market initiated by the Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) under Section 78 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. They argued that the later Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1963, a special

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