Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1293; 1986(1)ARBLR135(SC); 1985(2)SCALE410; 1985Supp(1)SCC280; [1985]3SCR26; [1985]60STC213(SC)
..... bahadur kamkashya narain singh of ramgarh v. commissioner of income-tax, bihar and orissa (1943) 11 i.t.r. 513. about the payment of minimum royalty under a coal mining lease. the question in that case was whether the annual amounts payable by way of minimum royalty to the lessor were in his hands capital receipt revenue receipt. the ..... lease quoted above, which illustrates how inadequate and fallacious it is to envisage the royalties as merely the price of the actual tons of coal. the tonnage royalty is indeed only payable when the coal or coke is gotton and despatched : but that is merely the last stage. as preliminary and ancillary to that culminating act, liberties are granted to ..... , to dig and sink pits, to erect engines and machinery, coke ovens, furnaces and form railways and roads. all these and the like liberties show how fallacious it is to treat the lease as merely one for the acquisition of a certain number of tons of coal, or the agreed item of royalty as merely the price of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1988SC2187; (1989)1CompLJ105(SC); JT1988(3)SC787; 1988(2)SCALE1574; 1989Supp(1)SCC504; [1988]Supp2SCR690; 1988(2)LC680(SC)
..... oberai 72 10.4. 1994 3. punjab lime lime-stone co. 96 12.12.1989 ___________________________________________________apart from these three, there are four other mines which are also operating under decrees/orders of courts as per the details below:_____________________________________________________ s.no. name of the lessee lease no. lease expired ..... being 20 years, the original period of lease has expired in all such cases where the leases commenced from 1962. but following are the mines where the original grant is still valid and their date of expiry is separately indicated:___________________________________________________ s. no. name of the lessee lease no ..... into a comprehensive litigation requiring appointment of committees, inspection and reports in them from time to time, serious exercises on the part of the mine owners before the committees, filing of affidavits both original and further, and lengthy arguments at the bar. these also necessitated several comprehensive interlocutory .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC281; [1973]43CompCas431(SC); (1972)2SCC877; [1973]2SCR464
A.N. Ray, J.1. We have had the advantage of reading the judgment written by our learned brother Mathew. 2. The question which falls for determination in this appeal is whether the respondent mill on recovering Rs. 32,254-6-9 from the Indian Globe Insurance Co. Ltd. and assigning all rights against the Railway Administration in favour of the insurance company as a subrogee was competent to institute and maintain the suit against the Railway Administration. 3. We agree with the reasoning and conclusion of our learned brother Mathew that subrogation does not confer any independent right on underwriters to maintain in their own name and without reference to the persons assured an action for damage to the thing insured. The right of the assured is not one of those rights which are incident to the property insured. 4. Counsel for the appellant contended that by reason of the assignment to the insurance company of all rights against the Railway Administration the respondent mill did not have ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1424; [1978(37)FLR138]; 1978LabIC1252; (1978)IILLJ350SC; (1978)3SCC332; [1978]3SCR1023; 1978(10)LC598(SC)
..... 1) of section 16. clearly, therefore the depreciation that was required to be deducted for the purpose of determining whether the appellant derived profit from the three coal washeries during the years 1964-65 to 1968-69, was not depreciation according to the straight line method followed by the appellant, but depreciation admissible under sub ..... the settlement, since the settlement was arrived at only between the appellant and the hindustan steel coal washeries workers' union and the settlement was accordingly not binding on them. strangely enough, though the appeal was dismissed and the award of the industrial ..... of bonus was settled, the appellant did not press the appeal and it was dismissed by this court. subsequently, however, another union called the hindustan steel coal washeries employees union, which is a minority union, filed civil misc. petition no. 3382/78, claiming that the workmen represented by it were not party to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC383; 1983(1)SCALE152; (1983)2SCC195; [1983]2SCR418
..... contained directions regarding the principle to be followed in determining the number of permits that could be issued and reservation of permits for operators displaced by nationalisation, educated unemployed, members belonging to the scheduled castes, the scheduled tribes and other backward classes, unemployed army drivers and cooperative societies.14. these directions ..... day. therefore, with a view to making it easier to secure permits in respect of non nationalised routes and to introducing simplicity in procedure and to providing greater employment and securing equitable distribution thereof it was considered necessary to amend sections 47, 50 ..... the relevant u.p. bill which read as follows:objects and reasons-operators engage in the race for securing permits for stage carriage on non nationalised routes. due to limitation on the number of permits this business is controlled by a few persons. complaints in this regard are made every other .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1298; (1982)1CompLJ1(SC); 1981(2)SCALE959; (1981)3SCC333; [1981]3SCR698
1. These three appeals by special leave arise out of a judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Madras dated October 6, 1978 allowing an appeal against the judgment of a learned Single Judge, dated May 17, 1978 in Company Petition No. 39 of 1977. The main contending parties in these appeals are : (i) the Needle Industries (India) Limited and (ii) the Needle Industries-Newey (Indian Holdings) Limited. These two companies have often been referred to in the proceedings as the Indian Company and the English Company respectively, but it would be convenient for us to refer to the former as 'NIIL' and to the latter as the 'Holding Company'. The Holding Company has been referred to in a part of the proceedings as 'NINIH'.2. In Civil Appeal 2139 of 1978, which was argued as the main appeal, NIIL is appellant No. 1 while one T.A. Devagnanam is appellant No. 2. The latter figures very prominently in these proceedings and is indeed one of the moving spirits of this acrimonious litigation....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC2120; 1997(1)ALD(Cri)157; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)762; 1997(1)BLJR263; 1998CriLJ2930; 1998(3)SCALE53; (1998)4SCC626; [1998]2SCR870
..... the legislation is enacted.' [p. 645]169. the other decisions of this court cited by shri rao do not lay down any different principle. on the other hand in sanjeev coke ., : [1983]1scr1000 , this court has laid down:-'no one may speak for the parliament and parliament is never before the court. after parliament has said what it intends to say ..... upon the decisions of this court in k.p. verghese v. income tax officer, : [1981]131itr597(sc) , r.s. nayak v. a.r. antulay (supra); state of orissa v. mahanadi coal fields, : [1995]3scr639 ; and narendra kumar maheshwari v. union of india, : [1989]3scr43 , shri rao has urged that the speech of the mover of the bill can be looked into .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1994(7)SC608; 1995(1)KLT172(SC); 1994(5)SCALE1; 1995Supp(2)SCC187; [1994]Supp5SCR526
..... before law or the equal protection of law under article 14 as they have to be raised against ail persons against whom the facts mentioned therein are established. after bank nationalisation's case and menka gandhi v. union of india, 1978 (1) scr 568, the procedure prescribed must also stand the test of article 21. it is settled law that the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1986SC1253; 1986(1)SCALE573; (1986)1SCC573; 1986Supp(1)SCC315; [1986]2SCR782; 1986(2)LC63(SC)
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. An election petition having been dismissed on the ground that it did not comply with the mandatory requirement to furnish material facts and particulars enjoined by Section 83 of the Representation of People Act and that it did not disclose a cause of action, the election petitioner has appealed to this Court under Section 116-A of the Representation of the People Act of 1951 (Act). 2. The respondent was elected as a Member of the Lok Sabha from the Amethi Constituency of Uttar Pradesh in the general elections held on 24th December, 1984 under Section 15 of the Act. Having secured the highest votes (3,65,041) the respondent was declared as elected on December 29, 1984. On 12th February, 1985, the last date from challenging the election the appellant (who claims to be a worker of the Rashtriya Sanjay Manch), an elector from the Amethi constituency, filed the election petition giving rise to the present appeal. 3. The election of the returned candidate, respondent here...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2009(57)BLJR2348; JT2009(7)SC248; 2009(7)SCALE341; (2009)6SCC498; 2009(6)LC2797(SC)
ORDER GRANTING PARDON27. We shall first deal with the order of the learned Sessions Judge granting pardon to Kumar Gaurav (PW 1).28 . Sections 306 and 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which are relevant for our purpose, read as under:306. Tender of pardon to accomplice : (1) With a view to obtaining the evidence of any person supposed to have been directly or indirectly concerned in or privy to an offence to which this Section applies, the Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Metropolitan Magistrate at any stage of the investigation or inquiry into, or the trial of, the offence, and the Magistrate of the first class inquiring into, or trying the offence, at any stage of the inquiry or trial, may tender pardon to such person on condition of his making a full and true disclosure of the whole of the circumstances within his knowledge relative to the offence and to every other person concerned, whether as principal or abettor, in the commission thereof. (2) This Section applies to- (...
Tag this Judgment!