Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC678; [1961(2)FLR594]; (1961)IILLJ94SC
..... singh, for it is not disputed that industrial tribunals used to give retrenchment compensation even before section 25-f was enacted and that section merely standardised the practice which was generally prevalent. in the circumstances, the order as to payment of one month's average salary as retrenchment compensation to iqbal singh must stand. however, the other part of the order .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1166; 1962(0)BLJR499; (1962)ILLJ294SC; [1962]Supp3SCR369
..... unconstitutional. 22. we have rejected the board contention that persons in the service of government form a class apart to whom the rights guaranteed by part iii do not, in general, apply. by accepting the contention that the freedoms guaranteed by part iii and in particular those in art. 19(a)(1) apply to the servants of government we should not ..... cls. (5) and (6) under which restrictions on the exercise of the rights conferred by sub-cls. (d) and (g) may be imposed if reasonable in the interest of the general public. 13. in this connection he laid stress on the fact that special provision had been made in regard to service under the state in some of the articles in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1969SC817; [1969]1SCR910
..... were not duly served and dismissed the suits. the plaintiff filed two appeals. before the high court the union of india conceded that the notices were duly served on the general manager, southern railway and the plaintiff elected to ask for a decree against the southern railway only. the high court held that the southern railway to which the goods were ..... extent as they would have applied if the animals or goods had been carried over only one railway administration.'14. it is to be observed that section 72 defines the general responsibility of a railway administration as a carrier of goods. sections 73, 74a, 74b, 74c, 74d, and 75 contain special provisions limiting the ..... general responsibility as defined in section 72. the effect of section 74e is that in the case of goods booked through over the railways of two or more administrations the consignor .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC2320; (1970)2SCC841; [1971]2SCR163
Bhargava, J.1. The appellant Hatti was declared a Bhumidar of some land belonging to the respondent, Sunder Singh, under Section 13 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act No. 8 of 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The respondent then brought a suit in the Civil Court claiming three reliefs. The first relief claimed was for a declaration that the declaration of Bhumidari issued in the name of the appellant with respect to the land in dispute was wrong, illegal, without jurisdiction, ultra vires, void and ineffective against the respondent. The second relief was that the respondent be declared entitled to Bhumidari rights under Section 11 of the Act; and the third relief was for possession of the land. The suit was brought on the allegation that the respondent was the owner of the land, while the appellant had no rights in it. The land along with some other land was on Mustrajri with one Sultan Singh for a period of 20 years ending in June, 1952, and the appellant had been admitted as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1972)4SCC342; [1972]1SCR854
K.S. Hegde, J.1. Civil Appeals Nos. 1956-57 of 1969 by certificates have become infructuous as the certificates on the strength of which those appeals were brought were not properly issued. To get over that difficulty, the Commissioner of Income-tax applied for and obtained special leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Assam and Nagaland. The appeals filed on the basis of the special leave granted are Civil Appeals Nos. 1426 and 1427 of 1971. At present we are only concerned with those appeals.2. The judgment under appeal is one rendered in a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (to be hereinafter called the Act). The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal after stating the case referred the following six questions for the opinion of the High Court :1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and upon a true interpretation of the provisions of the Second proviso to Section 34(3), the assessment for the year 1955-56 on the applican...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1336; (1973)GLR617; (1973)0GLR60; (1973)1SCC799; 1973(5)LC593(SC)
Palekar, J.1. These are appeals by special leave from the judgment and Order dated October 18, 1966 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Civil Revision Applications Nos. 446 of 1962 and 569 of 1962 respectively.2. Bai Hiragauri-the appellant, is the aggrieved land lady and the respondents Abdul Kadar Mamadji and Abdul Rahim Musaji respectively are the tenants. The suits were for their eviction. Abdul Kadar was let out the premises bearing No. 1155 on a monthly rent of Rs. 23/- and Abdul Rahim was let out another shop bearing No. 1155/2-3 and the monthly rent was Rs. 40/-. The tenants had agreed to bear the dues in respect of municipal taxes and consumption of electricity. Abdul Kadar did not pay the rent from 1st November, 1956 to 31st August, 1957 and similarly Abdul Rahim was in arrears of rent from 1st February, 1957 to 31st August, 1957. Under the law, they were liable to be evicted for being in arrears for more than six months. As required by law the land lady gave them no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1974SC2165; 1974CriLJ1486; (1975)3SCC219; [1975]1SCR753
..... their presence at the scene of offence but to be present is only to have an opportunity to witness. presence does not ensure truthfulness nor is it any insurance against the common human failing to involve the innocent along with the guilty. the presence of jhilmili and ram prakash may indeed discredit them if they were components ..... also. rajendra kumar is the brother-in-law of tribeni sahai's brother radhey shyam sharma who at the relevant time was stationed at lucknow as deputy inspector general of police and as a member of the vigilance commission. the trial court observed rightly that the witness could not be disbelieved merely because he was related to ..... misra is the brother-in-law of radhey shyam sharma who is the brother of the deceased tribeni sahai. radhey shyam was, at the material time, the deputy inspector general of police and was stationed at lucknow. the station house officer, yogendra sharma, asked a head constable to record the first information report. the s.h.o. signed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC2085; (1975)2SCC779; [1976]1SCR492; 1975(7)LC759(SC)
..... 17 of the act. section 17 allows an appeal to be preferred by any person who has made a claim under the act or any forest-officer or other person generally or specially empowered by the state government in this behalf, against an order passed on such claim by the forest settlement officer under section 11. the section prescribes a time .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC2478; (1976)4SCC42; [1977]1SCR354a; [1976]384STC435(SC); 1976(8)LC819(SC)
..... the evils of hoarding and scarcity on the one hand and ensuring availability on the other. sixth, after all the transactions in substance represent the out-going of the business and the price would come into computation of profits.14. judged by the principles laid down by this court in salar jung sugar mills' case, which is a decision ..... contracts may be entered into by or on behalf of the commission. the provisions of the oil & natural gas commission act show that the commission is engaged in the business of producing crude oil in assam and the supply of the crude oil. the supply to the corporation is a sale transaction fulfilling all the ingredients of a sale. ..... of the commission would also accrue on the principle that all of its crude was being sold to barauni refinery.11. the commission is described by the solicitor general to be a statutory body which has no option either with regard to the production or supply and the directions and decisions of the government leave no choice with .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1411; (1979)4SCC534; 1979(11)LC313(SC)
O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.The question in this appeal is about the compensation, to be awarded for the land belonging to the appellant which was acquired by the Government pursuant to a notification dated 17th March, 1960 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition, Act The Land Acquisition officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 12 per cent of land. This was confirmed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Anantapur, on a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act On appeal the High Court of Andhra Pradesh enhanced the compensation to Rupees 25 per cent after deducting an extent to 2 acres 69 cents of land from the total extent acquired Shri Vepa P. Sarathi, learned Counsel for the appellant argued that compensation was awarded at the rate of Rs. 26 per cent in regard to land in the adjoining Ramnagar Colony which was acquired in the year 1952 and that having regard to the upward trend of prices, higher compensation. should have been awarded for the land which was acquired i...
Tag this Judgment!