Privy Council Court March 1931 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Pondicherry Railway Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-26-1931
Lord Macmillan: For the years 1925-26 and 1926-27 assessment to income-tax and super-tax under the Income-tax Act, 1922 (11 of 1922) were made on "the Agent, Pondicherry Ry. Co. Ltd., Trichinopoly" in respect of the income derived by the company from its business. On appeal these assessments were confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Southern Range, Madura. The assessee thereupon under S. 66 (2) of the Act required the Commissioner of Income-tax for the Province of Madras to refer to the High Court of Judicature at Madras certain questions of law arising with regard to the validity of the assessment. The Commissioner accordingly stated a case in which he referred for the decision of the Court four questions of law, three only of which it is necessary to set out here viz.: "(b) Whether the Pondicherry Ry. Co. Ltd. which is resident without British India is liable to be assessed to income-tax on the income derived by it from the working of the Pondicherry Railway under S...
Parsotim Thakur and Others Vs. Lal Mohar Thakur and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-26-1931
Sir George Lowndes: The question for determination in this appeal is whether the appellants are entitled to redeem a series of usufructuary mortgages upon certain property, which is described as a separated one anna patti in a moiety of Mouza Rajapur in the Shahabad District. The other pattis are referred to incidentally in the case, but they are no part of the subject matter of the appeal. The mortgages in question were executed on different dates between 13th July 1883, and 23rd October 1914, by various members of a joint family now represented by appellants 6 and 7 Ram Prasad and Radha Prasad, in favour of the managing members of the respondents' family. A question was raised at the trial of the suit as to one Sita, another member of the mortgagors' family, who was said to have disappeared and was not joined as a party, but this has no bearing on the matter at issue in the present appeal. The mortgages all provided for redemption on the full moon day of Jeth in any year on repayment...
Bibi Aesha Vs. Mohammad Abdul Kabir
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-26-1931
Sir Lancelot Sanderson: This is an appeal by Bibi Aesha, the plaintiff in the suit, against a judgment and decree dated 19th December 1927, of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, which reversed a judgment and decree, dated 24th September 1926 of the Subordinate Judge of Patna. The suit was brought by the plaintiff to recover her share of the heritage of her father and mother. The claim include a prayer for a declaration that certain deeds named therein were inoperative, fraudulent and ineffective as against the plaintiff, and for confirmation of her possession, or in the alternative for possession of the properties mentioned in Sch. 6 of the plaint. The defendants were her four brothers: (1) Abdul Kabir, (2) Abdul Majid, (3) Muhammad Manir, (4) Abdul Hamid, and (5), (6) and (7) the widow and two minor daughters of a deceased fifth brother, Muhammad Nazir. The minor daughters appeared through their mother. There were certain other defendants, transferees from some of the defendants, ...
Eshugbayi Eleko Vs. Officer Administering the Government of Nigeria an ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-24-1931
Lord Atkin: This is an appeal from a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, which dismissed the appellant's appeal from the judgment of Tew, J., discharging what by consent of the parties was deemed to be a rule nisi for a writ of habeas corpus addressed to the respondents. The case has an unfortunate history. The appellant was ordered into custody on 8th August 1925, and though within a few hours he took every legal step to question the validity of his detention, the matter is still before the Courts and as will appear from this judgment, has still to be heard ab initio by the Supreme Court of the Colony. The case has already been before this Board on a refusal by one of the Judges, affirmed by the Supreme Court to hear an application for a rule nisi for habeas corpus on the ground that a similar application had already been heard and determined by another Judge. The Board then decided that the well-established rule that applications in habeas corpus may be made t...
Bhupendra Narayan Sinha, Bahadur Vs. Rajeswar Prosad Bhakat and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-24-1931
Sir George Lowndes: The question for determination in these consolidated appeals is as to the subsoil rights in a hill in mauza Nalhati, in the Birbhum District. There, beneath a stratum of stones and gravel, a valuable deposit of yellow ochre has been found, which is claimed by both parties-by the appellant as the zamindar and by the respondents as darputnidars holding by virtue of two putni grants dating from 1861. The respondents have worked the deposit on a considerable scale and have sold the ochre, for which there seems to be a ready market. The suit was instituted by the appellant on 12th December 1919, for a declaration of his ownership and possession of the subsoil, and an injunction restraining the respondents from digging and removing the stones, earth or minerals, including the ochre, and claiming a large sum as damages. The respondents pleaded that the subsoil rights had passed to them under the putnis and darputnis, and alternatively that they had acquired a prescriptive ...
Secretary of State Vs. Hindustan Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd.
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-20-1931
Sir George Lowndes: These are two consolidated appeals from a decision of the High Court of Bengal arising out of certain land acquisition proceedings taken for the purposes of the Calcutta Improvement Act (Bengal Act 5 of 1911). The property in question belonged to the Hindustan Co-operative Insurance Society, Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Society), and the questions sought to be raised by the appeals are as to the compensation to be awarded. Neither party was satisfied with the High Court's decision. The Secretary of State applied for a certificate enabling an appeal to His Majesty in Council. The Society objected that no appeal lay, but asked in effect that if a certificate were granted to the Secretary of State, a certificate should also be granted to them. The High Court granted certificates to both parties. The appeals were duly admitted and are before the Board for determination. The Society contend, as they did in the High Court, that no appeal is competent, and this que...
Bal Krishna and Others Vs. Ram Krishna and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-19-1931
Sir George Lowndes: The suit out of which these consolidated appeals arise was instituted in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Banda on 4th May 1925, by one Lal Man, praying for a partition of joint family properties. The family of which he claimed to be an undivided member consisted originally of himself and his three brothers, Kanhaiya Lal, Hazari Lal and Gulzari Lal, Lal Man being the eldest of the four and the karta of the family. They were admittedly governed by the Mitakshara law. The properties of which partition was claimed consisted mainly of the assets of a family money lending business, and certain houses and land. Kanhaiya Lal died some time prior to 1907, and Hazari Lal in 1908, but their stocks were adequately represented by their sons. Gulzari Lal died childless in 1920. Lal Man was the last survivor of the brothers and claimed by his plaint to be entitled to a one-third share of the family properties. He had no male issue but only sons of a daughter, who would, of c...
Raghunandan Ram Sahu and Others Vs. Mahanth Ramsunder Das and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-16-1931
Lord Salvesen: This is an appeal from a judgment and decree dated 11th August 1927, of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, which reversed a judgment and decree, dated 25th May 1923, of the Subordinate Judge of Darbhauga. The litigation relates to certain shares in four mauzas specified in the plaint which originally belonged to a number of Mahomedan ladies either in their own right or as guardians to their minor children. These properties were on 9th December 1921 formally conveyed by two absolute deeds of sale to the appellants, Raghunandan Ram Sahu and other members of his family, who were the defendants (second party) in a suit raised by the respondent, Mahanth Ramsunder Das, against them and the original proprietors of the subjects of sale (first party defendants). Mahanth Ramsunder Das has died since the suit was initiated and is represented by the guardian of his minor son. In his plaint he alleged that the same vendors, who were parties to the conveyances above referred to, h...
Wasif Ali Mirza Nawab Bahadur of Murshidabad Vs. Karnani Industrial Ba ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-16-1931
Lord Macmillan: By an order dated 15th July 1929, the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, allowing an appeal from an order of Lord Williams, J., appointed a receiver of the rents, issues and profits of certain properties in Calcutta in execution of several decrees obtained against the present appellant by the respondent bank. The sole question is whether it was competent to make this appointment in view of the terms of the Murshidabad Act, 1891 (No. 15 of 1891), which has reference to these properties. The purpose of that Act was to confirm and give effect to an indenture between the Secretary of State and the then Nawab Bahadur of Murshidabad, dated 12th March 1891. The indenture, which is duly confirmed by the Act and scheduled thereto, narrates at great length the circumstances which led up to it. It appears that the then Nawab Bahadur, the appellant's predecessor, who was the eldest son of the late Nawab Nazim of Bengal, Behar and Orissa, had agreed to relinquish th...
Shankar and Another Vs. Daooji Misir and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Mar-10-1931
Sir Lancelot Sanderson: This is an appeal by two of the plaintiffs in the suit, viz. Shankar and Ramnath, against a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 14th May 1928, which reversed a decree of the District Judge of Benares dated 10th November 1925. The last mentioned decree had affirmed a decree of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Benares dated 6th August 1925. Paltu, respondent 7 and plaintiff 1 in the suit, is the father of the plaintiffs-appellants. Munnu Lal was the father of Paltu ; Munnu Lal, Paltu and the plaintiffs appellants were members of a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshira law, and the house, which was the subject-matter of the suit, was part of the ancestral property of the said joint family. The suit was instituted on 8th November 1924; at that time Ramnath was a minor, and sued through Shankar as his next friend. The material facts are as follows: On 8th May 1915, Munnu Lal executed a deed conveying the said house to his son-in-law, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »