Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC505; 1962(0)BLJR594; [1962]Supp1SCR505
Shah, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Patna from an order commanding the Accountant General of Bihar, Ranchi, to pay certain passage allowance due under the Superior Civil Services (Revision of Pay and Pension) Rules, 1924, to the wife and the children of the respondent. 2. After passing the competitive examination held in London in August, 1924 the respondent N. Bakshi was admitted in November, 1924 to the Indian Civil Service and was, after his arrival in India, posted in the Province of Bihar. He continued to serve in the State of Bihar after independence. 3. On February 3, 1956, the respondent enquired of the Accountant General of Bihar about the number of passages to which he and the members of his family were entitled under the Superior Civil Services (Revision of Pay and Pension) Rules, 1924 - hereinafter called the Statutory Rules. The Accountant General, by letter dated March 6, 1956, stated that Pound 284-6 s. stood in the respo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1758; (1962)64BOMLR565; [1962]Supp1SCR700
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. This appeal by special leave arises out of a tenancy case instituted by the appellant against his tenants the respondents in the Court of the Mamlatdar Raver (East Khandesh), in the State of Maharashtra. The property in suit consists of agricultural lands, Survey Nos. 32 and 38, situated in the village Raipur. The respondents had executed a rent note in respect of these lands in favour of the appellant on February 5, 1943. The period for which the rent note was executed was five years and the rent agreed to be paid annually was Rs. 785/-. In ordinary course the lease would have expired on March 31, 1948. However, before the lease expired, on April 11, 1946 the Bombay Tenancy Act, 1939 (Bombay Act XXIX of 1939) was applied to the area of the East Khandesh where the lands are situated, and in consequence as a result of s. 23(1)(b) of the said Act the five years period stipulated in the rent note was statutorily extended to ten years; the result was that under the sa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC694; [1962]Supp1SCR753
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This petition has been filed under Art. 32 of the Constitution and it seeks to challenge the validity of the Kerala Agrarian Relations Act, 1960 (Act 4 of 1961) (hereafter called the Act). The petitioner owns about 1,250 acres of land in the Kerala State. These lands were originally situated within the erstwhile State of Cochin which now forms part of the Kerala State. Out of the lands owned by the petitioner nearly 900 acres are classified in the land records maintained by the State as Pandaravaka holdings while the remaining lands are classified as Puravaka holdings. By his petition the petitioner claims a declaration that the Act is ultra vires and unconstitutional and prays for a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction against the respondents, the State of Kerala, restraining it from implementing the provisions of the Act. It appears that a notification has been issued by the respondent on February 15, 1961, directing the implementation...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC723; [1962]Supp1SCR829
Wanchoo, J.1. These two writ petitions which were heard along with Purushothaman Nambudiri v. The State of Kerala : AIR1962SC694 raise the constitutionality of the Kerala Agrarian Relations Act, No. IV of 1961 hereinafter referred to as the Act. The petitioners come from that part of the State of Kerala which was formerly in the South Canara district of the State of Madras and came to the State of Kerala by the States Reorganisation Act of 1956. Their lands are situate in Hosdrug and Kasargod Taluks which have now been made part of the Cannanore District in the State of Kerala. They hold large areas of lands, the major part of which is held by them as ryotwari pattadars, according to the ryotwari settlement in the State of Madras under the Board's Standing Orders of that State. In these lands they have areca and pepper plantations besides rubber plantation. They also grow other crops on some of the lands. The Act is being attacked on the ground that it contravenes Arts. 14, 19 and 31 o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1006; [1962]Supp2SCR1
Ayyangar, J.1. The appellants in Civil Appeal 140 of 1954 are tobacco merchants and manufacturers of biris. They own private warehouses licensed under r. 140 of the Excise Rules, 1944 at Gondia and other places in Madhya Pradesh. 2. On the 28th of February, 1951 a Bill was introduced in the House of the People, being Bill 13 of 1951 containing the financial proposals of the Government of India for the fiscal year beginning the 1st of April 1951. Clause 7 of the bill made provision for the amendment of the Central Excise Act (Act 1 of 1944) by way of alteration of duties on 'tobacco manufactured and unmanufactured.' In particular, it provided that 'unmanufactured tobacco other than flue-cured and ordinarily used otherwise than for the manufacture of cigarettes' (which included tobacco intended for manufacture into biris) should be charged to an excise duty of 8 annas per lb. and it also imposed a new duty of excise on biris varying from 6 to 9 annas per lb. depending upon the weight of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1963]49ITR80(SC)
[DAS, KAPUR AND SARKAR JJ. delivered separate judgments. HIDAYATULLAH and RAGHUBAR DAYAL JJ. dealt with this appeal in their judgment in S. C. Prashar v. Vasantsen Dwarkadas : [1963]49ITR1(Bom) ].S. K. DAS J. - The facts of this appeal have been stated by my learned brother, Kapur J., and as I am in agreement with him, I need not restate the facts.The relevant assessment year was 1942-43. The proceedings under section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, were initiated with the issue of a notice on July 25, 1949. The assessees contention was that the initiation of proceedings on July 25, 1949, was invalid as the departments right to revive the assessment was governed by the old section 34 where the period of limitation prescribed was only four years in the case of failure to file a return and this period having expired on March 31, 1947, and the Amending Act of 1948 (XLVIII of 1948) having come into force on March 30, 1948, the eight years period provided therein could not be invoked...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1768; [1962]44ITR556(SC); [1962]Supp2SCR243
Ayyangar, J. 1. This appeal comes before us by virtue of a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh under s. 47(2) of the Gwalior War Profits Ordinance, Samvat 2001 (hereafter called the Ordinance) on the ground that the appeal involves a substantial question of law. 2. The question of law which arises in the appeal relates to the proper construction of r. 3(1) of the Schedule of the Ordinance. The respondent - M/s. Binodiram Balchand is the name under which a Hindu undivided family which was resident in the State of Gwalior carried on various businesses in that State. Profits derived from business carried in the State were charged to War Profits Tax under the Ordinance. Among the businesses carried on by the respondent was its employment as the Secretary Treasurer and Managing-agent of a textile mill which was a limited company bearing the name of Binod Mills Company Limited, Ujjain. The appeal is concerned with the computation of the profits of the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC876; [1962]Supp2SCR297
S.K. Das, J. 1. I regret that I have come to a conclusion different from that of my learned brethren in these appeals. I proceed now to state the necessary facts, the arguments advanced before us and my conclusions on the various questions urged. 2. By an order dated April 10, 1961 this Court granted special leave asked for by the two appellants herein, Pramatha Nath Talukdar and Saurindra Mohan Basu, to appeal to this Court from two orders made by the High Court Calcutta, one dated December 22/23, 1960 and the other dated March 17, 1961. By the first order a Special Bench of the Calcutta High Court dismissed two applications in revision which the appellants had made to the said High Court against an order of the Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta dated April 11, 1959 by which the said Magistrate issued processes against the two appellants for offences alleged to have been committed by them under Sections 467 and 471 read with s. 109 of the Indian penal Code on a complaint made by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC981; [1962]Supp(2)SCR257; [1962]13STC236(SC)
Hidayatullah, J.1. These six petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution have been filed by one Bhaiyalal Shukla, who was doing business of construction of buildings, roads, bridges etc., as contractor for the Public Works Department in Rewa Circle of the former Vindhya Pradesh State, now a part of the State of Madhya Pradesh. By these petitions, he challenges the levy of sales tax on building materials supplied by him in the construction of buildings, roads and bridges for the years, 1953-54 to 1958-59. For the first year in question, sales tax amounting to Rs. 1,840-5-0 has already been charged and paid. He seeks refund of this amount. For the remaining years except the last two, proceedings for assessment have been completed, but the amounts have not been paid. For the remaining two years, proceedings are pending for assessment of the tax. The respondents in the case are the State of Madhya Pradesh, which stands substituted for the State of Vindhya Pradesh, and diverse officers conn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC821; [1962]Supp2SCR411
S.K. Das, J.1. In these 13 writ petitions arises a common question of law, namely, the constitutional validity of some of the provisions of the Bombay Land Tenure Abolition Laws (Amendment) Act, 1958 (Bombay Act LVII of 1958) and in particular, of the provisions contained in Sections 3 and 4 read with Section 6 thereof. We shall hereinafter refer to this Act as the impugned Act, 1958. 2. Put very briefly, the case of the petitioners is that as a result of the provisions of the impugned Act, 1958, certain non-permanent tenants were deemed to be permanent tenants as from the commencement of the Bombay Taluqdari Tenure Abolition Act, 1949 (Bombay Act LXII of 1949), hereinafter referred to as the Taluqdari Abolition Act, 1949 and thereby became entitled to acquire on payment of six times the assessment or six times the rent instead of at least the minimum of twenty times the assessment, the rights of an 'occupant' within the meaning of s. 5A of the Taluqdari Abolition Act, 1949. This resul...
Tag this Judgment!