Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC76; (1956)IMLJ4(SC)
Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J.1. This appeal comes before us on leave granted-by the High Court of Madras. The appellants 2 to 6 are the legal representatives of V.O. Vakkan who was the plaintiff in the Subordinate Judge's Court and the appellant before the High Court of Madras.2. V.O. Vakkan was a resident of Palluruthy in the Cochin State and was trading in coir yarn. He was assessed by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chowghat (Madras State) to a sales tax of Rs. 12,301/4/- on a net turnover of Rs. 12,30,124/- for the year ending 31-3-1946, under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. He objected to this assessment on the ground that he was a non-resident foreigner so far as the Madras State was concerned and that he did not carry on any business either personally or through any agent within that State.His objections were overruled by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, the Commercial Tax Officer of Malabar and the Board of Revenue. . Thereupon, he filed a suit O. S. No. 25 of 1948 in the Sub...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC778; 1955CriLJ1642; (1956)IMLJ28(SC); [1955]2SCR583
Bose, J.1. The only question here is about sentence. 2. The appellant Bed Raj and another, Sri Chand, were jointly charged with the murder of one Pheru. The Sessions Judge convicted Bed Raj under section 304, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced him to three years' rigorous imprisonment. He acquitted Sri Chand. 3. Bed Raj appealed to the High Court and that Court, on admitting the appeal for hearing, issued notice to the appellant to show cause why the sentence should not be enhanced. The appeal and the revision were heard together. The appeal was dismissed and the High Court enhanced the sentence to ten years. 4. Now, though no limitation has been placed on the High Court's power to enhance it is nevertheless a judicial act, and like all judicial acts involving an exercise of discretion, must be exercised along well known judicial lines. The only question before us is whether those lines have been observed in the present case. 5. The facts that have been found by the Sessions Judge and ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC94; (1956)IMLJ63(SC); [1955]2SCR907
Venkatarama Ayyar, J. 1. This appeal raises a question of considerable importance as to the rights of holders of darmila or post-settlement inams of portions of a village under the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (Madras Act XXVI of 1948), hereinafter referred to as the Act. The subject-matter of this appeal is an one-sixteenth share in the village of Karuppur situated within the ambit of the Zamindari of Ramanathapuram. The holders of this ancient Zamindari were, during the 18th Century, the virtual rulers of that part of South India, and were known as Sethupathis or the Lords of Rameswaram and the adjacent isles and seas. In 1757 Muthu Vijaya Ragunatha, the then Rajah of Ramanathapuram, made a grant of the whole of the village of Karuppur to a number of persons for various charitable purposes. In 1802, the estate was permanently settled, and an istimrari sanad was issued in favour of the Rajah. Before that date, the donees under the grant of 1757 rep...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC44; [1955]28ITR941(SC); (1956)IMLJ79(SC); [1955]2SCR925
Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J.1. These appeals come before us on special leave to appeal granted under article 136 of the Constitution against two orders of the Calcutta High Court dismissing Criminal Revision Petitions Nos. 559 of 1951 and 312 of 1952 preferred by the appellants respectively. 2. In Criminal Revision Petition No. 559 of 1951, the High Court (Harries, C.J. and Banerjee, J.) confirmed an order made by a Presidency Magistrate discharging the accused on the ground of want of sanction under section 197, Criminal Procedure Code. 3. In Criminal Revision Petition No. 312 of 1952, Lahiri and Guha, JJ. set aside an order made by another Presidency Magistrate that no sanction was required and they quashed the proceedings against the accused. 4. The incidents which gave rise to the two complaints are closely inter-related and can be set out briefly. In connection with certain proceedings pending before the Income Tax Investigation Commission it was found necessary to search two premises...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC116; 1956CriLJ291; (1956)IMLJ100(SC); [1955]2SCR1140
Bose, J. 1. This appeal was referred to a Bench of five Judges in order to determine whether there was a conflict of view between Nanak Chand v. The State of Punjab : 1955CriLJ721 and Suraj Pal v. The State of U.P. : 1955CriLJ1004 , and if so, to determine it. 2. The appeal is against a conviction for murder in which the lesser sentence was given. The main ground is that the appellant was charged under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 34. His co-accused was acquitted, so, it was urged, the element of common intention drops out and accordingly section 34 cannot be called in aid. But the Courts below hold that the appellant inflicted the fatal blow and have made him directly liable for the murder. He contends that as he was not charged with having murdered the man personally he cannot be convicted under section 302. He relies on certain observations in Nanak Chand v. The State of Punjab ), and contends that the conviction is an illegality which cannot be cured and c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC407; 1956CriLJ797
Sinha, J.1. The appellant Chhutanni has been condemned to death in two separate trials for the murder respectively of his wife, Gunga and his cousin, Chhanga. Gunga was aged about 40 years according to the medical evidence and about 50 years according to the defence, which seems to be nearer the truth as she was the mother of three daughters who are all married, the second daughter having been married to Gokaran Pasi and having a child aged about five years.Gokaran is also said to have joined his father-in-law, the appellant, in murdering both Gunga and Chhanga. The deceased Chhanga was aged, according to the prosecution, about 28 years, and according to the defence, about 20 years. It appears that the appellant Chhutanni having no son of his own, inducted Chhanga into the family more as a member than as an employee, though his father would make it out that he was in the appellant's service.Between Chhanga and Gunga an illicit intimacy appears to have developed with the result that som...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC66; 1956CriLJ156; [1955]2SCR955
Bhagwati, J.1. This appeal with certificate under article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution arises out of an application under section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act (XXXII of 1952) and section 8 of the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act (XXXVII of 1850) read with article 227 of the Constitution filed by the respondent against the appellant in the High Court of Judicature of Patna and raises an important question as to whether the Commissioner appointed under Act XXXVII of 1850 is a Court. 2. The respondent is a Member of the Bihar Civil Service (Executive Branch). The State Government received reports to the effect that the respondent had been guilty of serious misconduct and corrupt practices in the discharge of his official duties while employed as Sub-Divisional Officer at Aurangabad and they accordingly decided that an inquiry into the truth of the various charges against him should be made under the provisions of the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 (Act XXXVII of 1850, hereinafte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC285; [1955]2SCR1331
Jagannadhadas, J. 1. This is an appeal by leave of the High Court of Calcutta under article 132(1) of the Constitution. The appellant before us was the Registrar and Accountant-General of the High Court a Calcutta its Original Side. He was appointed to the post by the Chief Justice of the High Court on the 4th March, 1948 and confirmed therein on the 15th of November, 1948. He was dismissed therefrom with effect from the 1st September, 1951, by an order of Chief Justice dated the 3rd September, 1951. There were various charges against him and Mr. Justice Das Gupta was deputed by order of the Chief Justice dated the 28th May, 1951, to make an enquiry and submit a report. Mr. Justice Das Gupta made a full enquiry and submitted his report on the 11th August, 1951, in which he exonerated the appellant in respect of some of the charges but found him guilty in respect of the other charges. The learned Judge expressed his conclusion as follows : 'Mr. Bose (the appellant) must be held to be gu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC298; 22(1956)CLT171(SC); [1956]1SCR28
Bhagwati, J.1. These petitions under article 32 of the Constitution are filed by the owners of Stage Carriage Services plying their buses on several routes in the districts of the State of Orissa impugning the provisions of Orissa Act XXXVI of 1947 and Orissa Act I of 1949 as violative of their fundamental rights. They raise a common question of law and can be disposed of by one judgment.2. The State of Orissa embarked upon a scheme of Nationalised State Transport and, as a first step towards it, enacted an Act styled the Orissa Motor Vehicles (Regulation of Stage Carriage and Public Carrier's Services) Act, 1947 (Orissa Act XXXVI of 1947), which modified the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, for the better regulation of Stage Carriage and Public Carrier's Services in the Province of Orissa. This Act envisaged the formation of a Joint-Stock Company in which the Central and the Provincial Governments shall together have controlling interests for providing in stages or in one s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC479; [1956]29ITR717(SC); [1956]1SCR267
ORDER No. 87. Under sub-section (7-A) of section 5 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (XI of 1922) the Central Board of Revenue hereby transfers the case of Biri Supply Company, 3/1, Madan Street, Calcutta from the Income-tax Officer, District III(1) Calcutta to the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Ranchi. Sd. (K. B. Deb), Under Secretary, Central Board of Revenue. 3. It is alleged and not denied by the respondent that the petitioner had no previous notice of the intention of the Income-tax authorities to transfer the assessment proceedings from Calcutta to Ranchi nor had it any opportunity to make any representation against such decision. Thereafter on the 2nd May 1955 the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Ranchi called upon the petitioner to submit its return for the assessment year 1955-56. It is then that the present petition was filed under article 32 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the Order of transfer dated the 13th December 1954 and the law under which su...
Tag this Judgment!