Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-07-1982
Reported in : AIR1982SC1518; 1982(1)SCALE849; (1982)3SCC270; [1983]1SCR498; 1982(14)LC631(SC)
D.A. Desai, J.1. A provision conferring power enacted to mollify slogans chanting public opinion of speedy justice, if not wisely interpreted may not only prove counter-productive but disastrous. And that is the only raison d'etre for this judgment because in the course of hearing at the stage of granting special leave Mr. D.V. Patel, learned Counsel for the respondent straightway conceded that this is such a case in which leave to defend could never have been refused. Unfortunately, however, not a day passes without the routine refusal of leave, tackled as a run of mill case by the High Court in revision with one word judgment 'rejected', has much to our discomfiture impelled us write to this short judgment.2. First the brief narration of facts. Respondent M/s. Prem Deva Niranjun Dava Tayal (Hindu Undivided Family) through Prem Deva Tayal, constituted attorney of Niranjan Deva Tayal (landlord) moved the Controller having jurisdiction by a petition under Section 14(1) proviso (e) [for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-03-1982
Reported in : AIR1982Cal440
..... licensee should give a personal guarantee to the effect that the value of the export of fish and fish products during the period of 7 years from the date of acquisition of the trawlers would not be less than rs. 47,10,000/-. the owner before the date of entering in the char-terparty agreement had already fulfilled that obligation. he ..... firm shall give a personal guarantee to the effect that the value of the export of fish and fish products during a period of seven years from the date of acquisition of the trawlers will not be less than rupees 47,10,000/- (rupees forty-seven lakhs and ten thousand only) and that the licensee shall become a member of ..... the absolute owner of two fishing trawlers avemaria i and ave maria ii registered under nos. 1567 and 1568 dated the 30th of january, 1974 with the registrar of indian ships, cochin. the said trawlers were imported by the said petitioner under an import licence no. p/cg/ 2062299 dated 3rd of march, 1971. as good deal of arguments were .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-12-1982
Reported in : AIR1983Bom88; 1983(2)BomCR185; (1982)84BOMLR509
..... provided at ports and s. 41 lays down that when any dock, berth, wharf, quay, stage, getty, or pier for receiving, landing, or shipment of goods or passengers from or upon vessels, has been made and completed, the board may after obtaining the approval of the collector of customs, published in three consecutive issues of the official gazette ..... and the person to whom they are delivered is called the bailee. it is clear, therefore that when the board takes charge of the goods from the ship-owner, the ship-owner is the bailor and the board is the bailee, and the board's responsibility for the goods thereafter is that of a bailee. the board does ..... of government bunders, wharves, landing places, piers and hards in the city of bombay. the act provides for fixation or determination of fees to be levied for the landing, shipping, wharfage, carnage, storage or demurrage of goods, and for permission for vessels or boat to approach or to be alongside, or on any government bounder, wharf or landing .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-05-1982
Reported in : AIR1983Delhi176; 23(1983)DLT148; 1983(4)DRJ161; 1983RLR73
..... act permitted land to be acquired for purposes of flood control on payment of nominal compensation while an adjoining land could be acquired for other public purposes under the land acquisition act, 1894 only on payment of adequate compensation. the court held that it was unjust discrimination between owners of land similarly situate by the mere accident of some land being ..... case of the deputy commissioner and collector, kamrup and others (supra) the 'and belonging to the respondent was sought to be acquired by the state of assam under the assam acquisition of land for floor control and prevention of erosion act, 1955 read with assam act 21 of 1960. the respondent had challenged the validity of the act on various grounds .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Oct-15-1982
Reported in : (1983)35CTR(Cal)254,[1983]144ITR317(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. Molins of India Ltd., Calcutta, is the assessee in this case. The relevant assessment year is 1974-75. The corresponding accounting period ended on 31st December, 1973. The accounts of the assessee-company were maintained on mercantile system.2. During the relevant previous year, the assessee-company was engaged in the manufacture of cigarette making and packing machineries. Net profit as per profit and loss account was Rs. 58,77,411. Income disclosed by the assessee was Rs. 62,98,280 but the ITO computed the total income at Rs. 66,91,550.3. The assessee preferred an appeal against the assessment order. Before the AAC, the assessee filed an additional ground stating that the ITO should have allowed the surtax liability of the assessee-company as a deduction. In support of its claim, the assessee relied upon a decision of the 'D' Bench of the Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Benches, in I.T.A. Nos. 3068 & 3097 (Bom) of 1972-73, dated 24th February, 1975. Being not sati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-18-1982
Reported in : AIR1982P& H301
M.M. Punchhi, J.1. In Amrit Sagar Kashyap v. Chief Commr., U. T. Chandigarh, (1980) 82 Pun LR 441, a Division Bench of this Court (the judgment of which was prepared by me and concurred by D. S. Tewatia, J.) had the occasion to interpret S. 8-A of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 (for short the Act) and in particular the meaning of the words 'resume' and 'resumption' occurring prominently therein. The view thus taken came to be doubted very often necessitating its re-examination by a Full Bench, on these two matters being referred to it, being Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 2830 of 1970 and 1149 of 1979, which await disposal at our end. Amusingly it has again fallen to my share to prepare the judgment, be it a case of reorientation or refurbishing the earlier view or one of substitution or reversal. A fresh look on the subject becomes essential uninhibited of the view taken by the Division Bench.2. A small legislative history would not be out of place. The town o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Oct-22-1982
Reported in : [1985]57CompCas668(Kar)
..... entirely does not apply to the nationalised banks since they acquire their corporate character not from any registration under the companies act, but they are established under the banking companies (acquisition and transfer of undertakings) acts, 1970 and 1980. so, only some of the provisions of the b.r. act are made applicable to the nationalised banks. 30. section 3(5 ..... . 58 of 1968 which came into force on february 1, 1969. 26. then came the nationalisation of fourteen major banks by act no. 5 of 1970, called 'the banking companies (acquisition and transfer of under takings) act', which came into force on july 19, 1969. 27. again, six more commercial banks were nationalised by act no. 40 of 1980, which came .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-08-1982
Reported in : [1985]58CompCas643(Delhi); 23(1983)DLT74; 1983(4)DRJ271; 1985(6)ECC226
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J. (1) Those are four appeals from the order of Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board dated 16th May, 1980. This Judgment will govern them all. (2) These are the facts.On 10-2-1973 the Customs Authorities of Palam Airport seized certain documents from the custody of Shri L. D. Bhatia, appellant in Crl. A. 183/80, who had arrived on a flight from Kabul. These documents were 27 in number. They were forwarded by the customs authorities. to the enforcement directorate on 9-1-1974. Among the seized documeats there was one paper, page 25, which appeared to be a balance sheet of a business concern called Reliable Traders of Kabul. The material entries at page 25 were as follows : 'NAME Of Thb Account Amount In Afghanis Cr. Leelawati 18,50,000.00 Motia Rani 16,00,000.00 Dr. L. D. Bhatia 62,800.00 Ram Lal Bhatia 2,75,510.00' (3) These four persons are residents of India and carry on business under the name of Bhatia Brothers at Delhi. (4) Now at the airport Bhatia wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-21-1982
Reported in : (1983)IILLJ476Bom; 1983MhLJ1058
..... annual cash bonus to the life insurance corporation and since the life insurance corporation was a corporation owned by the state, the impugned act was a law providing for compulsory acquisition of those debts by the state within the meaning of cl. 2(a), art. 31 of the constitution. that decision thus turned on the effect of a statute which purported ..... bonus would be paid at the rate of 20% of the gross salary/wages for the year 1975-76 without ceiling to all staff members subject to approval of the shipping development fund committee. there is no dispute that though the said committee granted approval it was conditioned by the fact that the grant would be subject to ceiling of wages .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-05-1982
Reported in : (1982)IILLJ84MP
G.P. Singh, C.J.1. The petitioners are all executives employed in the Bhilai Steel plant by the Steel Authority of India Ltd., a Government company registred under the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioners, grievance in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is that the respondents have wrongly deducted their salaries for the periods from 3rd August to 31st August, 1981 and 1st September to 11th September, 1981. The petitioners pray for issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondents for payment of their salaries for the aforesaid periods. Notice for admission of this petition was issued to the respondents in answer to which a return was filed and the petition was heard on merits.2. The respondents support the deduction of the petitioners' salaries on the principle of 'no work no pay'. The respondents' case is that though the petitioners attended the site or place of work during the said periods and signed the attendance register, they did not work at all in spite of vari...
Tag this Judgment!