Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 72

Statute: Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (transfer-of-property-act-1882)

come under the purview of superstructure, as mentioned in Section 2(k) of the Act, 2008. 12. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. (supra), after referring Sections 8, 9 and 22 of the Act 2008 has held in paragraph-5 of the said...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVISION No.12 of 2021 ====================================================== Rang Vikalp registered office at Studio Variation Artists Studio Sardar Patel Colony, Patliputra Colony Telephone Exchange Road behind SIS Security Office, Kurj...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225

1973 4 SCC 225Supreme Court of India

71% Match

FACTS: Challenged Kerala Land Reforms Act. 13-judge bench reviewed parliament's power to amend the Constitution. Held: Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, but cannot alter or destroy the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution. Ratio: Basic Structure doctri...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 447Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

71% Match

(ii) further for direction to the respondents particularly respondent no. 3, 4 & 7 to abstain from creating unnecessary and unreasonable restrictions upon the petitioners in exercising their right to Patna High Court CWJC No.729 of 2024(2) dt.25-04-2024 3/5 property including right to alie...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 536Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

71% Match

petition so that the matter could be taken to its logical conclusion. 6. Learned State counsel as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Gaya Municipal Corporation do not have any objection. Patna High Court CWJC No.729 of 2024(2) dt.25-04-2024 4/5 8. Paragraphs 17 to 20 of the petition a...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Bharat Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 873Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

71% Match

petitioners are alleged to have constructed the house over the forest land and thus, caused loss to the Government to the tune of Rs. 10,27,280/-. 4. It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11542 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 2/3 place of occurrence i.e. Khata / ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248

1978 1 SCC 248Supreme Court of India

71% Match

FACTS: Petitioner's passport was impounded without giving reasons. Held: Article 21 procedure must be 'just, fair, and reasonable', not arbitrary or oppressive. Ratio: Expanded Article 21 scope, introducing substantive due process principles into Indian jurisprudence....

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

the Bihar State Tourism Development Corporation (Annexure-5). Thereafter, an agreement was entered into between the parties on 29 th August, 2013. The consideration money was fixed as Rs.17.37 crores, Patna High Court C.R. No.12 of 2021(11) dt.12-01-2024 3/10 as per Clause 5 of the agreement. The ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

a sand stone statue of Lord Budha having 70 ft height in Bhumi Sparsh posture, on the platform of a height of 30 ft. The learned counsel submitted that as per the Agreement, 30 ft high platform was to be constructed first and thereon the statue of Lord Budha was to be installed. As such, ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

Pramod Sah presently residing at C/o Bachchu Rajak, Mohalla- Mahendru, Near Malariya Office, P.S.- Sultanganj, District- Patna, presently posted as Dresser in the Department of Surgical I.C.U. Patna Medical College and Hospital, Patna. 12.Pushpa Rani W/o Purushottam Das presently residing at - C/o ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 1Next Page →