119. The principle therefore would be that the court must look into the objectives of the two special acts. In case both the enactments have competing non-obstante provision, then the non-obstante clauses of the subsequent statute would prevail the non-obstante clauses found in the earlier enactment unless it is found that the subsequent act is a general one of the earlier enactment is a general statue.
Print Page
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Crl. Rev. No. 443/2009 & Crl.M.A.No.3071/2010
Date of Decision: 12th August, 2014
DELHI HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE ..Petitioner
VERSUS
UOI & ANR. ....Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
GITA MITTAL, J
Read full judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5vWGtQ14k1BaGQ4UEdVQ09BY2M/view?usp=sharing
Crl. Rev. No. 443/2009 & Crl.M.A.No.3071/2010
Date of Decision: 12th August, 2014
DELHI HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE ..Petitioner
VERSUS
UOI & ANR. ....Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
GITA MITTAL, J
Read full judgment: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5vWGtQ14k1BaGQ4UEdVQ09BY2M/view?usp=sharing
Citation: 2015CriLJ2054, 214(2014)DLT1
No comments:
Post a Comment