"assets held by the Court under sec.73 of C.P.C= Now, comparing Section73 of the present Code and Section 295 of the former Code we find that the words "realized by sale or otherwise in execution of a decree" have been deliberately omitted and the expression now used is "assets held by the Court". One can only conclude that the omission of the word "realized by sale or otherwise in execution" was deliberate and that it was the intention of the Legislature that the term, 'assets' should now include any assets held by the Court irrespective of the manner in which they came into possession of the Court. =2015 CALCUTTA (1921) msk lawreports

"assets held by the Court under sec.73 of C.P.C=  Now, comparing Section73 of the present Code and Section 295 of the former Code we find that the words "realized by sale or otherwise in execution of a decree" have been deliberately omitted and the expression now used is "assets held by the Court". One can only conclude that the omission of the word "realized by sale or otherwise in execution" was deliberate and that it was the intention of the Legislature that the term, 'assets' should now include any assets held by the Court irrespective of the manner in which they came into possession of the Court. =2015 CALCUTTA (1921) msk lawreports

Popular posts from this blog

Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 - permission of court for selling minor property by natural guardian- In the present case, though it is stated that the property has been sold for the proper benefit of the minors, their protection, education and marriage,there is nothing on record to suggest that previous permission of the Court was obtained by the natural guardian before transfer by sale in question.-2015 S.C.(2013) MSKLAWREPORTS24

APEX COURT DIGEST 2016 - 1

Section 25(1) of the Customs Act-exempted from payment of customs duty and additional duty leviable under the Customs Tariff Act.-Under Notification No.17/2001, that the benefit of duty exemption is available only for the import of the plant in full either in CKD or SKD condition. - The subject import can be considered only as a part of the plant.-Therefore, the goods under import are not eligible for the duty exemption as provided under the Notification No.17/2001.-what was imported was not a hot mix plant but only certain parts of such plant and, therefore, the exemption notification would not apply. -It is settled law that statements made to an Officer of Customs are admissible in evidence under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962.In the present case, both the oral evidence and the documentary evidence ultimately lead to the same conclusion: namely, that what was imported was not a hot mix plant that was complete in itself. - But not an unassembled Hot Mix Plant -have no application to an exemption notification which is issued under Section 25 of the Customs Act. - 2015 S.C. MSKLAWREPROTS