Skip to content

Privy Council Court December 1948 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.

Dec 20 1948

The Hulli Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. the Province of Bombay

Court: Privy Council

Decided on: Dec-20-1948

Lord Uthwatts: In the proceedings out of which this appeal arises the appellants sought a declaration that the purported revocation by the respondent Government on 28th, January 1944, of a licence to supply electricity to the town of Hubli was invalid and asked for consequential relief on the footing of that declaration. Their suit was dismissed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay acting in its original jurisdiction and that decision was affirmed by that Court in its appellate jurisdiction (Stone C. J. dissenting). Many matters at issue in the suit are not now in controversy. The substantial questions before their Lordships are confined to questions of construction arising under the Electricity Act (No. IX [9] of 1910). [2] Under that Act the Government was empowered to grant to persons to be selected by the Government licences to supply electrical energy in areas to be specified in the licences and to lay down electric supply lines for the transmission of such energy. [3] Secti...


Dec 20 1948

Badridas Daga and Another Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central and ...

Court: Privy Council

Decided on: Dec-20-1948

Lord Reid: The appellants in this case were, during the material time, partners of the firm of Rai Bahadur Bansilal Abirchand which carried on business both within British India and elsewhere. Each appellant had a quarter share in the firm. The firm was a registered firm resident in British India within the meaning of the Indian Income-tax Act. The first appellant was not ordinarily resident and the second appellant was not resident in British India within the meaning of that Act. A considerable part of the firm's income arose or accrued outside British India and was not brought into or received in British India. The question in the present case shortly stated is whether the appellants are bound to include in their total incomes for the purpose of Indian income-tax the whole of their shares of the firm's income or whether they are entitled to exclude a proportion of those shares corresponding to the proportion of the firm's income which arose or accrued outside British India. [2] The a...


Dec 07 1948

Adyanath Ghatak, Appellant Vs. Krishna Prasad Singh and Another, Respo ...

Court: Privy Council

Decided on: Dec-07-1948

Sir John Beaumont: This is an appeal from a judgment and decree dated 21st April 1943, of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, which reversed a judgment and decree dated 27th May 1940, of the Subordinate Judge, Dhanbad, Bihar. [2] The suit out of which this appeal arises was commenced on 11th January 1939, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Dhanbad, Bihar, by respondent 1, who will hereafter be referred to as "the plaintiff," against the appellant, who will hereafter be referred to as "defendant 1," and respondent 2, who will hereafter be referred to as "defendant 2." The plaintiff claimed a declaration of his title to the land in suit and a decree for possession against defendant 1, and other relief which is not material to the present appeal. The property in suit was a plot No. 2192, with buildings thereon, situate in the district of Manbhum, Pargana Jharia. [3] J The claim of the plaintiff against defendant 1 was based on the contention that defendant 1 was his tenant and esto...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial