Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian boilers amendment act 2007 section 10 amendment of section 9 Court: privy council Page 79 of about 1,298 results (0.513 seconds)

Mar 12 1929 (PC)

Official Assignee Vs. E. Narasimha Mudaliar

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1929Mad705; 118Ind.Cas.506

Coutts-Trotter, C.J.1. I have had the advantage in this case of perusing the judgment about to be delivered by Beasley, J. It sums up the results arrived at after a long discussion between him, Odgers and myself and it may be taken to be the judgment of the Court. I only add a few words because I feel it is incumbent upon me to do so as for 8 years I was in charge of the insolvency jurisdiction of the original side of the High Court. The procedure which was prohibited by the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Jnanendra Bala Debi v. Official Assignee of Calcutta : AIR1926Cal597 was that persons alleged to be indebted to the bankrupt estate-known in our Court for some reason, I never quite understood, as 'garnishees' should be examined, which of course in effect means cross-examined, by the Official Assignee under the powers of Section 36 and that statements made by them not amounting to a definite admission of indebtedness to the estate should be used under Section 7 to ask the Cour...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 1948 (PC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kamakhya Narayan Singh

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1949)51BOMLR182

Uthwatt, J.1. These four appeals are brought from judgments of the High Court of Judicature at Patna whereby four separate references made to that Court under Section 66(2) of the India.) Income-tax Act, 1922, as amended, were answered in favour of the assessees, the respondents to the several appeals.2. All appeals raise the question whether interest on arrears of rent payable in in respect of land used for agricultural purposes is exempt from income-tax as being agricultural income within the definition of that phrase contained in Section 2(7) of the [ndian Income-tax Act. In the second appeal a further question is raised to which their Lordships will refer later.3. Under Section 4(3)(viii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, agricultural income is exempt from assessment to income-tax. Agricultural income is defined in Section 2 of the Act as follows :-(1) 'agricultural income' means-(a) any rent or revenue derived from land which is used for agricultural purposes and is? either asse...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 01 1920 (PC)

Bhagwandas Maganlal Vs. Kaikhushroo Adarji Antia and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1921)ILR45Bom928

Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. The petitioner in this case is the owner of a house at Kalbadevi. The opponent is a tenant. Before the Bombay Rent Act came into force the petitioner gave notice to the opponent to g& out of the premises rented by him as the front portion of the petitioner's premises had been notified by the Municipality for the purposes of a set-back. On the 6th February 1918, the petitioner got a decree directing possession of the shop to be given to the petitioner before the 31st July 1918. Meanwhile, the Bombay Rent Act came into force and the opponent applied to the Court to suspend the execution of the decree which had been passed. An order was made on the 23rd August 1918:For the present I allow defendant ten months' time from today to vacate, reserving liberty to both parties to apply on expiration of the ten months. No execution without notice. I do not think the premises in suit come within the set-back and his intention to use it for himself seems only an excuse t...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 02 1949 (PC)

Amir Chand and anr. Vs. the Crown

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1950P& H53; 1950CriLJ480

ORDERDas, C.J.1. This application for bail raises an important and indeed an interesting question as to the power of the High Court to grant bail to persons who have not yet been arrested on any actual charge of any offence or even on suspicion of their complicity with any offence but who apprehend that they may be harassed by being arrested on unfounded suspicion or a false charge.2. The application has been made by two petitioners. The petitioner Amir Chand is a practising lawyer at Karnal and is also a Municipal Commissioner at Panipat/ He is a Director of several companies at Karnal, Panipat and Delhi and ia the Chairman of the Board of Directors of one of them. The petitioner Baghu-nath Bass claims to have been a leading businessman of Gujranwala having had a mill at Kamoka in the district of Gujranwala and paying annually Rs. 35,000 as land revenue and Bs. 3,000 as income.tax. Since the partition of the Punjab, this petitioner migrated to Delhi where he is the Chairman of the Boa...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1933 (PC)

R.T. Rangachari Vs. Secretary of State

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1934Mad516

Beasley, C.J.1. These two appeals can be dealt with together. Although the facts are different, the main point for decision is common to both. The facts in each appeal may be briefly Stated. In O.S. No. 1 of 1931 the appellant brought a suit against the Secretary of State for India in Council, the respondent in this appeal. In that suit he asked for a declaration that he was wrongly dismissed, after he has been discharged on an invalid pension and for damages amounting to Rs. 9,900. His case was that he was discharged in October 1927 on an invalid pension and whilst a pension it was dismissed on February 1928 on the ground that he had been found guilty of misconduct before his retirement. The result of this was that his pension was withdrawn. His case was and is that under Rule 351 of the Civil Service Rules a pension can be withdrawn only if the pensioner bas been guilty of misconduct subsequent to his retirement. He next contends that his dismissal was contrary to the provision in Su...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1911 (PC)

Colonel Lecky Vs. Bank of Upper India, Ltd.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 9Ind.Cas.1023

1. On the 24th day of December 1900 the Bank of Upper India Limited obtained a money-decree against three Officers of His Majesty's Regular Forces. No application for execution of this, decree, as the term is ordinarily understood, was made until the 8th day of April 1910 when the decree-creditor applied to the Subordinate Judge of Meerut for execution of the decree by attachment of half of the salary of one of the said Officers, Colonel R. Lecky, appellant to this appeal.2. The judgment-debtor, Colonel R. Lecky, objected to the attachment proposed by the decree-creditor on the grounds that:1. the application was barred;2. his salary was not liable to attachment;3. the decree does not empower the decree-holder to realise under it certain premiums alleged by the decree-holder to have been paid in order to keep alive certain insurance policies held by the Bank as security for the monies originally advanced by the said Bank.3. Other objections were raised, but the present appeal is not co...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1918 (PC)

Samanthala Koti Reddi Vs. Pothuri Subbiah and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1918)34MLJ494

John Wallis, C.J.1. As observed by Seshagiri Aiyar, J. in his order of reference the point for decision is whether in consequence of his want of bona fides the first defendant forfeited his right to notice before suit under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Both the referring Judges were of opinion that the act done by the defendant came within the words 'any act purporting to be done by such public officer in his official capacity. 'These words were introduced into Section 424 of the Code of 1877 by Act XII of 1879, and the corresponding Section 80 of the present Code was further amended by substituting 'any' for ' an ' and ',such public officer' for 'him'. According to the concise Oxford Dictionary recently published at the Clarendon Press, to 'purport' in this context means to 'be intended to seem'. There can be no doubt that the act of the Village Munsif in handing over the surplus proceeds of the revenue sale to the defaulting owner was an act 'intended to seem' to be don...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 18 1932 (PC)

Shidramappa Nilappa Ujalambe Vs. Neelavabai Chanbasappa

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1933Bom272; (1933)35BOMLR397

Baker, J.1. A preliminary question arises in this appeal as to who is the heir of respondent No. 1, Bhagirthibai, the original plaintiff. The contest is between Neelava, respondent No. 4, who is the widow of Chanbasappa, the separated brother of Bhagirthibai's husband Shivlingapa, and Shivlingappa's three sisters Akavva, Sangava, and Kushava. The point is of importance as Neelava supports the appellant, and therefore if she is found to be the heir of Bhagirthibai there is not likely to be much oppostion to the appeal. It is settled law in the Bombay Presidency that the sister inherits immediately after the father's mother and before the father's father under the Mitakshara. But it is contended that her place in the order of succcession is affected by Act II of 1929, Hindu Law of Inheritance (Amendment) Act, Section 2, which provides that a son's daughter, daughter's daughter, sister, and sister's son shall, in the order so specified, be entitled to rank in the order of succession next ...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 1930 (PC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. the Remington Typewriter Company Li ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1931)33BOMLR413

Russell, J.1. The dispute in this appeal has, by reason of a recent decision of their Lordships' Board, been reduced to small compass.2. A statement of the relevant facts is, however, necessary.3. Assessments, in respect of the two financial years 1924-1925 and 1925-1926 were made under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), upon the Remington Typewriter Company (Bombay), Limited, as agent for the Remington Typewriter Company of New York. This last-mentioned company is a company incorporated in the United States of America and carries on the business of manufacturing and selling the well-known Remington typerwriting machine. These two companies may be conveniently referred to as the Bombay Company and the American Company respectively.4. The assessments were made in respect of (1) dividends paid by two Indian Companies, viz., the Remington Typewriter Company (India), Limited, and the Remington Typewriter Company (Madras), Limited, to the American Company ...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1941 (PC)

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M. Jamal Mohamed Sahib, Trustee for ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1941Mad535; (1941)2MLJ148

Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The assessee in this case is the muthavalli of a wakf called the Allajanathud-Deeniya, which was created by one Jamal Mohideen Sahib by a deed, dated the 21st December, 1923. The deed directs that half of the annual net income shall be utilised for the expenses of maintenance, education, marriage, funeral and other necessities of such members of the donor's family in the male line as in the opinion of the muthavalli are in poor and needy circumstances. The muthavalli himself is allowed to benefit from this portion of the net annual income if he also happens to be in poor and needy circumstances. The other half of the annual net income is to be utilised for such charitable purposes as (a) helping new converts to Islam by giving them religious instruction, (b) giving help to Muslim orphans, (c) giving secular, especially industrial and technical education to Muslims, (d) helping poor and needy Muslims of the Sunni sect, (e) spreading knowledge of the Isl...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //