Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1716; 1962(0)BLJR832; [1963]1SCR70
Wanchoo, J.1. This appeal on a certificate granted by the Punjab High Court raises a question as to the interpretation of Art. 31 of the Limitation Act. The appellant had brought a suit in forma pauperis for recovery of a sum of over Rs. 24,000/- from the Union of India (UOI) in connection with non-delivery of certain goods booked with the railway. The appellant was trading in Gujranwala, which is now in Pakistan, under the name and style of G. M. Bootamal and Company and also under the name and style of Gopal Metal Rolling Mills and Company he being the sole proprietor of both. On August 5, 1947, just before the partition the appellant handed over two consignments to the North Western Railway at Gujranwala for carriage to Jagadhari and these consignments were booked on the same day by two railway receipts. The consignments however did not reach Jagadhari. The appellant made inquiries and when no delivery was made he made a claim on the railway on November 30, 1947, for the price of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1573; [1963]1SCR121
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. The appellant R. R. Chari was a permanent employee in a gazetted postunder the Government of Assam. In 1941, his services were lent to theGovernment of India. The first appointment which the appellant held under thegovernment of India was that of the Deputy Director of Metals in the MunitionsProduction Department at Calcutta. Then he came to Delhi on similar work in theoffice of the Master-General of Ordnance which was the Steel Priority Authorityduring the War period. He was subsequently transferred to Kanpur as AssistantIron & Steel Collector in 1945. Sometime thereafter, he became the Deputyfrom Iran & Steel Controller, Kanpur Circle; which post he held for onemonth in September, 1945. From January, 1946, he was appointed to the said postand he held that post until September 20, 1946. The period covered by thecharges which were eventually formed against the appellant and others is fromJanuary 1, 1946 to September 20, 1946. On the latter date, the appellantproce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC445; 1962(0)BLJR709; (1963)IMLJ104(SC); [1963]1SCR148
Subba Rao, J.1. This appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the High Court at Patna raises the question whether - to use neutral terms - the keeping or using of a radio set by the person without a licence would be an offence under section 20 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885), hereinafter called the Act. 2. The respondent is a businessman, having a shop in the city of Patna. In November, 1955 an Inspector of Wireless Telegraph visited his shop and found a radio set being played therein. As he was using the radio without a licence, he was prosecuted, under sections 3 and 6 of the India Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 (17 of 1933) and section 20 of the Act. The Judicial Magistrate, Patna City, convicted the respondent under the said sections and sentenced him only under section 20 of the Act to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge, Patna, confirmed both the conviction and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1733; [1963]1SCR404; [1962]13STC529(SC)
Venkatarama Aiyar, J.1. These are appeals against the judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Petitions Nos. 1172 of 1956 and 56 of 1957 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution questioning the validity of the Andhra Act XIV of 1955 insofar as it imposes a tax on the sale of Virginia tobacco. The appellants are firms doing business in the exports of tobacco. The usual course of that business is stated to be that they first enter into contracts with their customer abroad for the sale of tobacco, that thereafter they purchase the requisite quantities of goods locally and then export them to the foreign purchases in performance of their contracts. Prior to October 1, 1953, the area wherein the appellants carried on business formed part of the State of Madras, and on that date the State of Andhra was constituted, and the area in question fell within that State. The law relating to sales tax in force in that areas is the Madras General Sales Tax Act, IX of 1939. Section 5 of this...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1406; [1963]1SCR491
S.K. Das, J.1. These are three consolidated appeals which arise from the judgment and order of a Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court dated August, 9, 1957. They have been preferred to this Court on the strength of a certificate granted by the said High Court under Art. 132 of the Constitution certifying that the cases involve a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of Art. 301 and other connected articles relating to trade, commerce and intercourse within the territory of India, contained in Part XIII of the Constitution. These appeals were originally heard by a Bench of five Judges and on April 4, 1961, that Bench recorded an order to the effect that having regard to the importance of the constitutional issues involved and the views expressed in the decision of this Court in Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. v. The State of Assam : [1961]1SCR809 , the appeals should be heard by a larger Bench. The appeals were then placed before the learned Chief Justice for necessary orders, an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC274; (1963)65BOMLR378; [1963]1SCR721
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 109 of 1957. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated March 1, 1956, of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No. 20 of 1956. G. S. Pathak, K. H. Bhabha, H. M. Vakeel and I. N. Shroff, for the appellants. C. K. Daphtary, Solicitor General of India, B. K. Khanna and P. D. Menon, for the respondents. C. K. Daphtary Solicitor General of India S. N. Andley, Rameshwar Nath and P. L. Vohra, for the Interveners. 1962. April 11. The Judgment of Sinha C. J., Ayyangar, Madholkar and Aiyar, JJ., was delivered by Ayyangar, J., Subha Rao, J. delivered a separate judgment. AYYANGAR, J.-This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court affirming the judgment of a learned Single Judge whereby a petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution by the appellants was dismissed. By their petition, the appellants challenged the validity of a notification issued by Forward Markets Commission a statu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC447; 1962(0)BLJR891; [1963]2SCR52
Kapur, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the High Court of Calcutta quashing the investigation started against the respondent in regard to offences under s. 420, Indian Penal Code, and s. 120B read with s. 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. On March 26, 1960, Sub-Inspector B.L. Ghose of Police Inforcement Branch filed a written report before the Officer-in-charge Chakdha P.S., alleging that the respondent in conspiracy with three others had cheated the Government of West Bengal of a sum of Rs. 20,000. The respondent at the time was an Assistant-cum-Executive Engineer, Kanchrapara Development Area, Kalyani Division. On the basis of this report a First Information Report was drawn up and the police started investigation. On April 4, 1960, the respondent surrendered in the court of the Judicial Magistrate at Ranaghat and was released on bail for a sum of Rs. 1,000/-. The respondent then on May 9, 1960, filed a petition under Ss. 439 and 561A of the Criminal Procedure...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC255; [1963]2SCR111
Wanchoo, J. 1. This is an appeal on a certificate granted by the Calcutta High Court. The respondent was appointed the Chief Refugee Administrator of the Burma Refugee Organisation in November, 1942, and held that post till August 25, 1944 when he was suspended. He was believed to have embezzled large sums of money belonging Government which were at his disposal as the Chief Refugee Administrator, in conspiracy with certain persons. It was in that connection that he was suspended on August 25, 1944, and investigation into the alleged offences began thereafter. In that connection, the respondent was arrested in October, 1944, and was bailed out. Eventually, on July 21, 1945, the respondent was prosecuted under Sections 120-B and 409 of the Indian Penal Code before the Second Special Tribunal constituted under the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, No. 29 of 1943 (hereinafter referred to as the 1943-Ordinance). In the mean time, the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance No. 38 of 1944 (hereina...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1796; (1963)65BOMLR292; [1963]2SCR73
Ayyangar, J.1. This appeal comes before us by virtue of a certificate of fitness granted by the Nagpur Bench of the High Court of Bombay under Arts. 132(1) and 133(1)(c) of the Constitution. It arises out of a petition filled by the appellant under Art. 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur impugning the constitutional validity of certain notifications and directions issued under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, and the Export Control Order, 1958, framed thereunder and substantially prayed that the Joint Chief Controller of Imports & Exports, Bombay impleaded as the first respondent should be directed to consider the application of the appellant for the grant of a licence to enable him to export certain manganese ore which he had won from his mines, without reference to the impugned notifications. This petition was dismissed by the learned Judges of the High Court who, however, granted the appellant is certificate which has enabled him to file th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC217; [1963]2SCR333
Das Gupta, J. 1. This appeal by special leave arises out of a complaint made by the appellant, the Upper Doab Sugar Mills Ltd., Shamli, to the Railway Rates Tribunal. The complaint as originally made was against the station to station rates on sugarcane on the Shahdara (Delhi) - Saharanpur Light Railway imposed by the respondent, the Railway Company, by their rates Circular No. 8 of 1953 with effect from October 1, 1953. The complaint was that these rates had been and were unreasonable. The Railway Company in their answer to the complaint pointed out that the rates imposed by the rate Circular No. 8 of 1953 had long before the date of the complaint ceased to be in force and that subsequent to the decision of this Court in S.S. Light Railway Co. Ltd. v. Upper Doab Sugar Mills Ltd. : 1983CriLJ1044 a new rate had come into operation from February 10, 1960, under Local Rate Advice No. 2A of 1960. After this the complaint prayed for amendment of his complaint by adding a complaint against t...
Tag this Judgment!