Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Sarang V. Kotwal, Sandesh D. Patil, JJ
Delta Corp Limited – Appellant
Versus
U.T. Administration of Daman and Diu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual chronology of laws, applications, and refusals. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 2. petitioners argue section 13a applies, invoke estoppel. (Para 29 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 3. respondents contend 1992 amendment unnotified, no estoppel. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 4. 1992 amendment invalid without central government notification. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66) |
| 5. administrator lacks power to commence the amendment act. (Para 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74) |
| 6. no mandamus or estoppel against law and public policy. (Para 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84) |
JUDGMENT: [Per Sarang V. Kotwal, J.]
1. We have heard Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners and Mr. Anil Anturkar, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents.
2. The Petitioner No.1 owns and operates a five star hotel called ‘The Deltin’ at Varkund, Nani-Daman. The Petitioner No.2 is Deshmane(PS) the Director of the Petitioner No.1. The Respondent No.1 is t
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
