Privy Council Court February 1937 Judgments

Ali ZamIn Vs. Akbar Ali Khan and Others

Court: Privy Council

SIR GEORGE RANKIN: The sole question in this appeal is whether a wakfnama, dated 25th May 1917, is valid and operative according to Shia law. The settlor was the late Nawad Haji Syed Nawab Mehdi Husain Khan, commonly known as Badshah Nawad. The suit was brought on 9th January 1920, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Patna by the respondent, Syed Akbar Ali Khan alias Syed Chhotey Nawab one of the two serviving brothers of the settlor. The main though not the sole purpose of the suit was, to obtain a declaration that the deed of 25th May 1917 was invalid, and did not'in law operate as a dedication of the properties comprised therein, and that, notwithstanding the deed, the plaintiff was entitled to possession of a third share of the properties by inheritance from his brother, the settlor, who had died on 19th March 1919. The appellant before their Lordships Syed Ali Zamin who was defendant 1 in the suit; by the terms of the deed he was appointed to be sole mutawalli on the death of...

Fakir and Others Vs. King Emperor

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1937PC119

LORD THANKERTON: This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment and order of the Court of the Resident at Hyderabad, dated 17th January 1936, which affirmed the convictions and sentences passed upon the appellants by the Additional Sessions Judge of Secunderabad by his judgment dated 28th November 1935. The appellants and another were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, sitting without jury or aid of assessors. The learned Judge convicted the appellant Fakira of offences punishable under Ss. 148 and 302, I. P. C. and sentenced him to two years' rigorous imprisonment under S. 148 and to death under S. 302. The appellant Shankar was convicted under S. 148, and was sentenced to two and a half years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200 and in default to suffer four months' rigorous imprisonment. The appellant Kunnay Lingayya was convicted under S.147, and was sentenced to 18 months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200 and in default to suffer four mont...

Bharat Dharma Syndicate, Ltd. Vs. Harish Chandra

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1937PC146

LORD RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: This is an appeal from an order of the High Court of Allahabad, by which it was ordered that the appellant company, the Bharat Dharma Syndicate Limited, be wound up, The decree was made on the petition of the respondent, who when he presented the petition was the holder of one ordinary share of Rs. 25 upon which Rs. 12 had been paid up. He deposited the balance of Rs. 13 in Court during the proceedings. The petition was heard by two Judges, Thom, and Iqbal Ahmad, JJ. A long and elaborate reserved judgment was delivered, which dealt in great detail with the history of the company from its formation down to the time when the petition was presented, and with the evidence and credibility of the witnesses in the case. The Court came to the conclusion that the company ought to be wound up on two grounds viz.-(i) that it was insolvent and (ii) that it was just and equitable that it should be wound up owing (to put it shortly) to its fraudulent notation and its fraudu...

Mangal Singh Vs. King-emperor

Court: Privy Council

LORD ALNESS: This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Lahore, dated 27th April 1936, which affirmed the conviction of the appellant and the sentence of death passed upon him by the Sessions Judge of Montgomery, dated 13th February 1936. The following is a summary of the relevant facts : One Narain Singh married a widow, Mt. Harnam Kaur, who died in or about the year 1931. The appellant is her son by a previous marriage. By her marriage with Narain Singh she had four sons, the eldest being Kartar Singh. After the death of Mt. Harnam Kaur, Narain Singh indulged in a liaison with his widowed sister-in-law Mt. Basant Kaur. In the early part of October 1935, Narain Singh disappeared from his home. Following upon a panchayat, searchers, including the appellant, were despatched with a view to finding the missing man. On 13th October the searchers, other than the appellant, returned unsuccessfully from the search. The appellant was not see...

Mt. Fatima Begum Vs. Ahmad Ali Khan and Another

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1937PC121

LORD ALNESS: This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Lahore, dated 15th January 1934, which modified and reversed a decree of the Senior Subordinate Judge of Ludhiana, dated 19th March 1928. The appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of a dower. The principal question in issue is whether the respondents, as legal representatives of one Aftab Ali Khan, who is dead, are bound to pay a dower now aggregating Rs. 36,000. The claim involves that Aftab Ali Khan was liable as a surety to pay the dower, and that his liability was transmitted on his dearh to the respondents. The trial Judge held that Aftab Ali Khan was liable to the plaintiff for payment of the dower, and accordingly passed a decree to that effect. The High Court at Lahore, on appeal, held that Aftab Ali Khan was not liable as a surety in respect of the dower. Certain other questions were dealt with in the judgments of both Courts in India, but they are no linger in issue between the parties and need...

Commissioner of Income-tax, United and Central Provinces, Vs. Badridas ...

Court: Privy Council

LORD RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: In this case the Commissioner of Income-tax for the United and Central Provinces appeals from a judgment of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner, Central Provinces, on a reference under S. 66 (2), Income-tax Act, (11 of 1922). The respondent tax, payer did not appear on the hearing of the appeal. The case relates to an assessment made by the Income-tax Officer under S. 23 (4) of the Act, subsequently to an alleged failure by the taxpayer to comply with all the terms of a notice issued under S. 22 (4) of the Act. It will be convenient before stating the facts of the case to set out the provisions of the Act [as amended by the Income-tax (Amendment) Act, 1930, and the Income-tax (Second Amendment) Act, 1930] which are relevant, and under which the various steps in the case, leading up to the reference, were taken. They are the following: 22.-(1)....... (2) In the case of any person other than a company whose total income is, in the Income-tax Officer's opinion...

Nathu Mal Vs. Raman Mal and Others

Court: Privy Council

LORD RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: In this appeal their Lordships are called upon to construe a mortgage instrument which may be fairly described as a primitive piece of conveyancing, the language of which is sadly lacking in clearness and precision. It is dated 15th May 1919. The parcels which constitute the security for the loan consisted of two houses and a shop in Amritsar, and two shops in the city of Lahore. The two shops in Lahore were subject to two mortgages in favour of one Raman Mal dated respectively 26th February 1906, and 9th March 1918, while the whole of the abovementioned property (including the two shops in Lahore was subject to a mortgage in favour of one Lala Balla Mal dated 5th May 1917. It was for the purpose (inter alia) of paying off this last mentioned mortgage that a sum of Rs. 13,500 was borrowed from the appellant Nathu Mal, and the repayment thereof was secured by the deed of 15th May 1919. The security was for a fixed term of two years and carried interest at a rat...

Bishambhar Nath Kapoor and Others Vs. Lala, Amar Nath and Others

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1937PC105

LORD THANKERTON: The appellants are the plaintiffs in a partition suit, which was instituted on 11th February 1928. The suit was dismissed by a decree of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Lucknow dated 31st March 1930, which, on appeal, was affirmed by a decree of the Chief Court of Oudh dated 25th January 1932. The parties in the appeal are Mitakshara Hindus, and their relationship is shown in the following pedigree : CHART: The only issue now left in the suit is whether a deed of family settlement executed by Ganesh Prasad and Mahesh Prasad on 22nd September 1926 constitutes a valid family settlement, binding on those members of the joint family who were not parties to it. This deed was made shortly before the death of Mahesh Prasad on 2nd October 1926. The plaintiff-appellants are the three sons of Ganesh, of whom Bishambar Nath was major at the time of the deed. The respondent Amar Nath, son of Mahesh and his minor son, the respondent Ram Nath, along with the three appellants, we...

Alexander Kennedy Vs. the King

Court: Privy Council

LORD ROCHE: This is an appeal by special leave Against the conviction of the appellant on 20th October 1934, by the Supreme Court of Ceylon (Assize Court of Colombo) sitting with an English-speaking jury of seven jurors. The indictment upon which the appellant was convicted contained two counts-: the first under S. 419, Penal Code, for that on 29th September 1933, he caused mischief by fire in respect of a building which contained his shop, and the second under S. 418 of the Code for the like offence in respect of the property in his shop. The appellant pleaded not guilty and the trial lasted from 3rd September to 20th October 1934, when the appellant was found guilty by a unanimous verdict on both counts and was sentenced to a term of six years' imprisonment on each count, the sentences to run concurrently. The circumstances out of which the proceedings arose were in outline as follows: The appellant, a native of the United Kingdom, had lived in Colombo since 1909 trading in boots and...

Maritime Electric Co., Ltd. Vs. General Dairies, Ltd.

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1937PC114

LORD MAUGHAM: This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada dated 28th June 1935, reversing a judgment of the Appeal Division of the Supreme Court of New Nrunswick. That Court had affirmed a judgment in the King's Bench Division whereby the appellants had recovered against the respondents the sum of $19,31.82 and costs. The appellants are a private company which sells electrical power in the City of Fredericton, New Brunswick. The company is however a "public utility" company with the meaning of the Public Utilities Act of New Brunswick (Ch. 127 of the Revised Statutes, 1927). It is accordingly under a statutory duty (S. 10) to furnish reasonably adequate service and facilities. It has annually to make to the Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities established by the Act some elaborate returns. It is strictly limited as to the rates, tolls, and charges which it can make and exact, which must be in exact accordance with filed schedules open to publ...