Apex Law Journal
Apex Law Journal
An online law journal reporting latest and important judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.                                                                                                                         Click here to get free legal updates via email                                                                                                                          Click here to download forms (Address Form, List Of Documents and Memorandum Of Appearance)
User Name :
Password :
New Subscriber
Forgot Password
 

Editor

Neha Goel, Advocate

Advisory Board

S.C. Khunger, Advocate

Rohit Bansal, Advocate

Varinder Singh Kanwar, Advocate

Hittan Nehra, Advocate

Judgments on Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957

Sunday, August 12, 2007
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957

Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 — Section 126(4) — Word ‘made’ — Decision of the Division Bench of the High Court that the date of the order 'made' in terms of Section 126(4) of the Act should be taken to be the date when the same was communicated to the assessee and not the one when it was signed, held, is not sustainable in the eyes of law — Further held, Division Bench of the High Court, proceeded on a wrong premise insofar as it misconstrued and misinterpreted the word 'made' in the context of sub-section (4) of Section 126 of the Act opining that the power can be misused by the Commissioner — The Division Bench, failed to notice that there exists a presumption that the official act is presumed to have been done in regular course of business — There also exists a presumption that a statutory functionary would act honestly and bona fide — Appeal allowed. 

 
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957

Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 — Section 345-A, 343, 344 — Whether MCD under the DMC Act has power to seal premises in case of its misuser? — Held, yes — Under Section 345-A of the DMC Act, the Commissioner of MCD is empowered to exercise power of sealing in case of misuser of any premises — Conclusion of the High Court that action under Section 345A can be taken only when there exists order of demolition under Section 343 or on passing of an order under Sub-Section (1) of Section 344 in no other contingency, held, cannot be accepted in view of the clear provision of Section 345-A that action can be taken even before or after an order is made under those provisions. 

 
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957

Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 — Section 331 r/w 345-A — Conjoint reading of the definition of the expression ‘to erect a building’ in Section 331 and Section 345A, held, makes it clear that conversion of user would come within the purview of the expression ‘to erect a building’ — In this respect useful reference can also be made to Building Bye-Laws for the Union Territory of Delhi, 1983, in particular Bye-Law Nos. 2.17 and 2.85, defining the expressions ‘Conversion’ and ‘To Erect’ respectively — Therefore if a building/structure not originally constructed for use as a shop, is put to use as shop, such conversion of use would come within the ambit of the expression ‘to re-erect’ and, consequently, within the ambit of the definition of the expression ‘to erect a building’. 

 
Act Topic
Rule Citation
Keyword
 
Free Text Search
 
Follow us on :
(Best view with 1024x768 Resolution)
© All rights including Copyrights and rights of translations etc, reserved and vested exclusively with Deepak Publications. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronics, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in any retrival system of any nature without the written permission of the copyright owner.

By using this site, you (and any entity on whose behalf your are acting) are consenting to be bound by Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy & Disclaimer Clause.