SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1925 Supreme(Cal) 135

SANDERSON, PANTON
Ram Gopal Goenka – Appellant
Versus
Corporation of Calcutta – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sanderson, C.J. - This was a Rule issued by my learned Brothers Mr. Justice Newbould and Mr. Justice Bepin Behary Ghose calling upon the Municipal Magistrate and on the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation of Calcutta to show cause, why the order complained of should not be set aside or such other order made as to this Court might seem fit and proper.

2. The order complained of was an order made by the Municipal Magistrate of Calcutta, dated the 28th of February 1925, by which the Magistrate directed the demolition of certain unauthorized structures by the Corporation of Calcutta at the expense of the owner.

3. The proceedings in this case present some peculiarities. The alleged unauthorized structures were made before the 1st of April 1924. The notice which was served upon the petitioner was headed " Section 364 Act III (B. C.) of 1923 (i. e.. the Calcutta Municipal Act of 1923, which came into force on the 1st of April 1924) The notice was to the effect that the petitioner was directed to appear to show cause before the Municipal Magistrate of Calcutta, why an order should not be made u/s 364 of Act III (B. C.) of 1923, directing that so much of the building as had be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top