Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-30-1962
Reported in : AIR1963Mad434; 1963CriLJ636
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This appeal, filed against the judgment of Balakrishna Ayyar, J., raises a question as to the constitutional validity of Section 171-A of the Sea Customs Act. That provision has been challenged as void before us on the ground that it contravenes Articles 14 and 20(3) of the Constitution. But the objection to the validity of the section under the first head, namely, that it denies equal protection of laws to persons similarly situate, was not taken before the learned Judge; nor even in the grounds of appeal before us. But in view of importance of the matter and as the learned Advocate-General had no objection to the question being raised at this stage, we have allowed learned counsel for the appellant to argue that point.2. We shall now set out the circumstances which have necessitated the appellant to call to his aid the Fundamental Rights declared under Articles 14 and 20(3).3. The appellant is a merchant at Madras trading under the name of Rainbow Trading ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Oct-17-1962
Reported in : AIR1963Raj129
D.M. Bhandari, J. 1. This is a Civil Second Appeal in a suit filed by Badri Narain, who is now represented in this appeal by his three sons, Chauthmal, Baboo, Radhey Shyam and Mst. Naraini his widow against Mst. Sanjya defendant-appellant and Bhoora Mal, another defendant. 2. The case as set up in the plaint is that on the 28h of July 1951, Mst. Sanjya, the defendant-appellant borrowed Rs. 901/- from the plaintiff and in security thereof mortgaged a shop situate in the town of Monoharpur and deliversd possession thereof. It was also agreed that the defendant-appellant shall pay 1 per cent per mensem as interest towards which Rs. 25/- per annum were to be adjusted as rent of the shop. This agreement was recorded in the khata (Ex. P/1) which beam the thumb impression of the defendant-appellant. It is further alleged that the defendant-appellant delivered the possession of the shop but the plaintiff was dispossessed therefrom on the 20th of May 1953 and refused to pay the money borrowed b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-04-1962
Reported in : AIR1963SC1; [1963]3SCR22
J.C. Shah, J.1. Ramalingam Mudaliar-a resident of Bangalore (in the former Indian State of Mysore)-started life as a building contractor. He prospered in the business and acquired an extensive estate which included many houses in the Civil and Military station at Bangalore, in Bangalore city and also in the towns of Madras, Hyderabad and Bellary. He dealt in timber, established cinematograph theatres, obtained a motor-car selling Agency and made investments in plantations and coffee estates. He set up a factory for manufacturing tiles, and later floated a sugar company. The Indian Sugars & Refineries Ltd., of which he became the Managing Agent and purchased a large block of shares. For some years before his death Ramalingam had taken to excessive drinking, and was subject to frequent coronary attacks. He became peevish and easily excitable and his relations with his wife and children were strained. Ramalingam felt great disappointment in his eldest son Vishwanatha who borrowed loans fr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Dec-04-1962
Reported in : AIR1964Mad90
S. Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.1. This petition filed under Article 223 of the Constitution raises a question as to the validity of the Madras Inams Assessment Act, 1956 (Act 40 of 1956), (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with a view to quash Notification made thereunder.2. The petitioner, Sri Vedaranyaswaraswami Devasthanam is being maintained with the income from, and is we grantee of, several inams which are spread over in about 23 villages in the Tanjore district. One such inam is an extent of 46 acres 43 cents in the village of Pannal in Thithuraipoondi taluk. This is a minor inam where both the warams in the land are owned by the petitioner subject to an annual payment of Rs. 15-75 nP. by way of jodi or cesses to the Government. The title deed issued in favour of the Manager of the devastanam confirms the inam for the support of the temple, 'tax free to be held without interference so long as the conditions of the grant are duly fulfilled'. The lands covered by the inam are in the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-14-1962
Reported in : AIR1963SC1150; [1963]Supp2SCR55
Ayyangar, J. 1. This appeal comes before us on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh under Art. 133(1)(a) of the Constitution. 2. The following facts are necessary to be stated to appreciate the contentions urged before us. We consider it would be convenient to refer to the parties by their array in the trial Court. The 2nd defendant - firm Hajee Abdul Kadir Sahib and Lala Batcha Sahib & Co., had been apparently carrying on business in several places including Vizianagaram, Bellary, Madras etc., in skins and hides since 1941 when the partnership was formed between the 3rd and the 4th defendants. It was common ground that from about 1947 of 1948 the firm had not been doing any business in Vizianagaram and by the time it had contracted quit a large volume of debts, the tannery business there proving a loss. The two partners accordingly entered into a deed of dissolution dated March 31, 1949, in which it is stated that the book-debts, stock in trade, immovab...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-07-1962
Reported in : (1963)0GLR691; [1964]52ITR921(Guj)
K.T. Desai, C.J. 1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the India Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessment year with which we are concerned is the year 1955-56, the accounting year being the calendar year 1954. The assessees were shareholders in a company incorporated in accordance with the law prevailing in East Africa called Kawampe Cotton Co. Ltd., Kampala. Having regard to the provisions contained in the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, this company was regarded as a company for the purpose of the Indian Income-tax Act. This company went into voluntary liquidation on 22nd July, 1954. In the month of August 1954, the liquidator of the company made payments to the assessees who were the shareholders in that company. The amounts paid to the assessees were received by the assessees on 27th August, 1954. The following tabular statement shows the names of the assessees, the number of shares of the company held by them, the amounts received by them referable to the share capital, the amoun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-11-1962
Reported in : [1963]Supp2SCR915
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. The appellants, the Trustees of the Port of Madras, hereinafter called the Board, appeal against the order of the High Court of Madras allowing the writ petitions filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution by each of the respondents and issuing a writ of mandamus directing the appellants to forbear from enforcing the scale 'E' rates of the Madras Port Trust Scale of Rates and from requiring the signing of the Shore Labour Requisition Form from the steamer agent. 2. The respondents, who are either partnership firms or limited companies, carry on the business of steamer agents at Madras. The Board, with the sanction of the Central Government, made amendments to the Madras Port Trust Scale of Rates in 1958. By the amendment, scale 'E' was added under Chapter V. It was to come into force from March 1, 1958. The scale laid down charges to be paid by masters, owners or agents of vessels in respect of Port Trust labour requisitioned and supplied but not fully or properly ut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-20-1962
Reported in : AIR1963Bom225; (1962)64BOMLR602; ILR1963Bom612
Palekar, J. 1. These four appeals arise out of four suits filed for the recovery of certain amounts by way of refund of tax alleged to have been illegally recovered by the Municipal Committee, Dhaman-gaon. The two First Appeals are from decrees passed by the learned Second Additional District Judge, Amravati in Civil Suits Nos. 17-A of 1952 and 18-A of 1952 respectively. The other two Second Appeals arise out of two suits filed in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandur, being suits Nos. 100-B of 1956 and 70-B of 1957 respectively. All the suits were substantially decreed by the trial Courts. From the suits decreed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Chandur, appeals were filed to the District Court, the appeals being Nos. 44-B and 45-B of 1959. The learned District Judge reversed the two decrees passed by the trial Court and dismissed the suits. From that order the two Second Appeals have been filed in this Court.2. All these appeals were heard together as the mor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-07-1962
Reported in : AIR1963SC1019; [1963]Supp1SCR912
Wanchoo, J. 1. This petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution challenges the constitutionality of U.P. Land Tenures (Regulation of Transfers) Act 1952, (U.P. XV of 1952), (hereinafter called the Transfer Act) and the Indian Forest (U.P. Amendment) Act 1958, (U.P. V of 1956), (hereinafter referred to as the Forest Amendment Act). The case of the petitioner is that he obtained a permanent lease from the Maharaja Bahadur of Nahan of certain land known as 'asarori' land, situate in the district of Dehra Dun, in Uttar Pradesh. The area leased out to him was 1069.68 acres in Khewat No. 1, Mahal No. 8, Khasra Nos. 1 A, 1-B and 2. This land was originally a Crown grant and had been free from revenue since 1866. Initially, it belonged to Major P. Innes but was subsequently transferred to the Maharaja Bahadur of Nahan. On January 25, 1951, an agreement was executed by the Maharaja Bahadur in favour of the petitioner and one Virendra Goyal for lease of this land for a consideration of an annual ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-14-1962
Reported in : AIR1963SC1436; [1963]48ITR154(SC); [1963]Supp2SCR92
S.K. Das, J. 1. This appeal on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Bombay raises a question of interpretation of sub-s. (10) of s. 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. This sub-section is one of a group of sub-sections substituted or inserted in the said section by s. 19 of the Finance Act, 1956 (Act 18 of 1956). By s. 28 of the said Finance Act, sub-s (10) of s. 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, came into force on April 1, 1956. The short question before us is, whether on its true construction, sub-s. (10) of s. 35 applies in a case where a company declares dividends by availing itself wholly or partly of the amount on which a rebate of income-tax was earlier allowed to it under clause (i) of the proviso to Paragraph B of Part I of the relevant Schedules to the Finance Acts, when such dividends were declared prior to the coming into force of the sub-section, that is prior to April 1, 1956. 2. The facts which have given rise to the appeal are these. The Ahmedabad ., i...
Tag this Judgment!