Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL/CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.113 OF2016KAUSHAL KISHOR PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION @ (DIARY) No.34629 OF2017JUDGMENT V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.PRELUDE Said the Tamil PoetPhilosopher Tiruvalluvar of the Tamil Sangam age (31, BCE) in his classic Tirukkural. Emphasizing the importance of sweet speech, he said that the scar left behind by a burn injury may heal, but not the one left behind by an offensive 1 speech. The translation of this verse by G.U. Pope in English reads thus: In flesh by fire inflamed, nature may thoroughly heal the sore; In soul by tongue inflamed, the ulcer healeth never more. A Sanskrit Text contains a piece of advice on what to speak and how to speak. satyam bryt priya bryn na bryt satyam apriyam | priya ca nnta bryd ea dharma santana || The meaning of this verse is: Speak what is true; sp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1605; [1977]107ITR938(SC); (1977)2SCC378; [1977]3SCR153
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave directed against the judgment of the Delhi High Court answering in favour of the Revenue a question which was directed to be referred by the Tribunal under Section 66(2) of the Indian I. T. Act, 1922. The controversy between the parties arises out of an assessment made on the assessee as a Hindu Undivided Family for the assessment year 1948-49 the corresponding accounting year being the financial year 1947-48. The assessee was at the material time a Hindu Undivided Family with one Roshan Lal as its manager and karta. Till June 1947 the assessee was carrying on business in gold and jewellery at Chowk Surjan Singh in Lahore. In view of the pending partition of India Roshan Lal decided to move out of Lahore and accordingly he transferred a sum of Rs. 12,094/-from the account of the assessee with the Lahore Branch of the Punjab. National Bank Ltd. to the New Delhi Branch of that bank in June 1947. He also transferred from the Lahore Br...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC12; [1959]29CompCas367(SC); [1960]1SCR200
S.K. Das, J.1. These are seven appeals on behalf of different Banks working in this country, some incorporated in India and some outside India. It is necessary that we should very briefly state the background of the industrial dispute which has given rise to these appeals. It is now well-known that there was a sharp rise in the prices of commodities during and after World War No. II. This rise in prices very seriously affected salaried employees belonging to the middle class including such employees in the banking industry. In or about the year 1946 trade unions of bank employees presented demands for higher salaries and allowances and better conditions of service. In some cases notices of threatened strike were also served on the employers. The unrest became particularly acute in the provinces of Bombay, the United Provinces, and Bengal as they were then known. The local Governments of those provinces referred these industrial disputes for adjudication : this resulted in some regional...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1982SC149; 1981Supp(1)SCC87; [1982]2SCR365
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. These writ petitions filed in different High Courts and transferred to this Court under Article 139 of the Constitution raise issues of great constitutional importance affecting the independence of the judiciary and they have been argued at great length before us. The arguments have occupied as many as thirty five days and they have ranged over a large number of issues comprising every imaginable aspect of the judicial institution, Voluminous written submissions have been filed before us which reflect the enormous industry and vast erudition of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and a large number of authorities, Indian as well as foreign, have been brought to our attention. We must acknowledge with gratitude our indebtedness to the learned Counsel for the great assistance they have rendered to us in the delicate and difficult task of adjudicating upon highly sensitive issues arising in these writ petitions. We find, and this is not unusual in cases of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC2328; (1977)GLR919; (1977)0GLR90; 1977LabIC1857; (1977)4SCC193; [1978]1SCR423
1. We have heard the learned Attorney-General and Mr. Seervai fully on the various points arising in this appeal. We will deal with the arguments of the learned Counsel later by a considered judgment or judgments. For the present we will only say that since we are informed that the parties to the appeal have arrived at a settlement, the appeal shall stand disposed of in terms of that settlement. Those terms are as follows:On the facts and circumstances on record the present government do not consider that there was any justification for transferring Justice Sheth from Gujarat High Court and propose to transfer him back to that High Court.On this statement being made by the learned Attorney-General, Mr. Seervai Counsel for respondent No. 1 (Justice S.H. Sheth) withdraws the writ petition with leave of the Court.The following Opinions were delivered:Chandrachud, J. This appeal by certificate involves the question as to the constitutionality of a notification issued by the President of In...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC540; [1957]1SCR488
Das, C.J. 1. This is an application for special leave to appeal from the judgment passed on February 10, 1955, by the High Court of Andhra. The suit out of which this application arises was instituted on April 22, 1949, in the sub-court of Bapatla, which was then within the jurisdiction of the Madras High Court. The judgment of the trial Court was passed on November 14, 1950, dismissing the suit. The plaintiff appealed. On October 1, 1953, the Andhra State was formed and a new High Court was established under s. 28 of The Andhra State Act, 1953 (Act XXX of 1953), and apparently the appeal stood transferred to the High Court of Andhra under the provisions of s. 38 of the same Act. On March 4, 1955, the High Court of Andhra accepted the appeal, reversed the decree of the trial Court and decreed the suit. The application for leave to appeal to this Court was dismissal on the ground, inter alia, that the value of the property was only Rs. 11,400 and did not come up to the amount of Rs. 20,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1457; (1978)3SCC558; [1979]1SCR122
Krishna Iyer, J.1. What are we about A raging rain of writ-petitions by hundreds of merchants of intoxicants hit by a recently amended rule declaring a break of two 'dry' days in every 'wet' week for licensed liquor shops and other institutions of inebriation in the private sector, puts in issue the constitutionality of Section 59(f)(v) and Rule 37 of the Punjab Excise Act and Liquor Licence (Second Amendment) Rules, (hereinafter, for short, the Act and the Rules). The tragic irony of the legal plea is that Article 14 and 19 of the very Constitution, which, in Article 47, makes it a fundamental obligation of the State to bring about prohibition of intoxicating drinks, is pressed into service to thwart the State's half-hearted prohibitionist gesture. Of course, it is on the cards that the end may be good but the means may be bad, constitutionally speaking. And there is a mystique about legalese beyond the layman's ken !2. To set the record straight, we must state, right here, that no fr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1288; [1962]Supp1SCR405
Sinha, C.J.1. The Petitioners in these Writ Petitions, under Art. 32 of the Constitution, complain of interference with their rights under the several Khor Posh grants, and pray for writs of certiorari or mandamus and further orders or directions to the respondents for the enforcement of their alleged rights. In Writ Petition No. 79 of 1957, the first respondent is the State of Orissa, and the Union of India is the second respondent. In all the other Writ Petitions, the State of Orissa is the sole respondent. As most of the questions of law relating to the interpretation of the Constitution, or other laws hereinafter to be referred to, are common, the cases have been heard together. But in order to appreciate the points arising in these cases, it is necessary to state the facts of each case separately. I. Writ Petition No. 79 of 1957. 2. In Writ Petition 79 of 1957, the petitioner is the younger brother of the present Raja of Talcher, which was an independent sovereign State before its...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC1288; JT1997(4)SC44; (1997)ILLJ1217SC; 1997(2)SCALE670; (1997)10SCC142; [1997]2SCR798
ORDERSujata V. Manohar, J.1. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., the second respondent in this appeal has about 12,000 employees. Out of these about 1850 employees are working in the refinery division of the second respondent. Process Technicians and Analysts' Union which is the appellant-Union has a membership of about 411 employees in the refinery division of the second respondent-corporation. 2. Prior to 1976 there were two companies; one was Burmah Shell Refineries Ltd. which was an Indian company and the other was Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Company which was a foreign company registered in the United Kingdom and was a marketing company. On or about 24th of January, 1976, the entire share capital of Burmah Shell Refineries Ltd. was purchased by the Government of India and Burmah Shell Refineries Ltd. became a Government Company, and later a public Sector Undertaking. The Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Company which was a foreign company was acquired by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1974SC1764; (1975)3SCC351; [1975]1SCR57
K.K. Mathew, J.1. This is an appeal, on the basis of a certificate, by the first defendant, from a decree in a suit for partition of the assets of one Dr. Krishnan who died in England on October 18, 1950, according to the provisions of the Travancore Ezhava Act and the dispute between the parties now is concerned with the question of succession to the sale proceeds of the movables and other moneys included in Schedule-C to the plaint.2. Krishnan had two brothers, namely, Padmanabhan and Govindan, the first defendant, and a sister, the second defendant. Krishnan went to England in 1920 for higher studies in medicine. For some time his father helped him with money but, after the father's death, his elder brother Padmanabhan did not send him any money and, therefore, Krishnan had to find his own resources for prosecuting his studies. He received considerable encouragement and financial help for carrying on his studies from an elderly English lady by name Miss Hepworth. When Krishnan becam...
Tag this Judgment!