Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-31-1970
Reported in : AIR1971Bom174; (1970)72BOMLR698
Desai, J. 1. This is an appeal on behalf of the original respondents from the Judgment and order of Mr. Justice Vimadalal dated September, 28, 1967, granting an order of injunction restraining the original respondents from assessing or reassessing the Colaba Land and Mills Company Limited hereinafter referred to as the Mills Company to income-tax for the assessment years 1950-51 to 1955-56. 2. It is sufficient to notice that in the Company petition No. 221 of 1958 the Official Liquidator was appointed Interim Liquidator of the Mills Company by an Order dated May 1, 1959. By an Order dated October 7, 1959, the Mills Company was ordered to be wound up and the Official Liquidator was confirmed as Liquidator of the Mills Company with all powers under Section 457 of the Companies Act 1956. By six different Notices dated August 23, 1966, issued under Section 14 of, the Income-tax Officer, Companies Circle I (8), Bombay, recorded in respect of the assessment years 1950-51 to 1955-56 that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jan-12-1970
Reported in : [1970]40CompCas611(All); [1971(21)FLR357]; (1970)IILLJ393All
V.G. Oak, C.J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution a certain regulation framed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereafter referred to as the ' Corporation ') has been challenged. Shyam Lal Sharma is the petitioner. The Corporation is respondent No. 1. The chairman of the Corporation is respondent No. 2.2. The Corporation was established under the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act') with effect from the 1st of September, 1956. The petitioner is an employee of the Corporation. Section 49 of the Act has conferred on the Corporation power to make regulations. By virtue of that authority, the Corporation has made a number of regulations. Regulation No. 25 prohibits employees of the Corporation from participating in politics and standing for elections. According to the petitioner, regulation No. 25 violates a number of fundamental rights conferred on him by Article 19 of the Constitution, and is, therefore, void. The petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-27-1970
Reported in : AIR1971Bom304; 1972MhLJ710
Padhye, J. 1-13.14. According to the learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant, the policy in this case was effected on the 30th of July, 1956 when the proposal was accepted by the Insurance Company and in any case not later than 4th of August. 1956 when the payment of the first premium was received by the Company's Bombay Office. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the defendant-Corporation contends that the policy must be taken to have been effected on 22-10-1956 when the document of policy was issued by the Indian Mercantile Insurance Company Limited (Ex. P. 16). We have been referred first to the words in Section 45 itself which relate the word 'effected' to the word 'policy'. It is stated that the word 'policy' used in Section 45 means a document of policy issued formally as in Ex. P16 and since such policy in the present case has been issued on 22-10-1956 that must be taken to bethe date on which the policy has been effected. Secondly, we were referred to Section 66, Sub...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-27-1970
Reported in : [1973]43CompCas284(Bom)
..... v. new india assurance co. ltd., ratan lal v. metropolitan insurance co. ltd., new india assurance co. ltd. v. tambireddi subba raghavareddi, lakshmi insurance co. ltd. v. bibi padmawati and mithoolal nayak v. life insurance corporation of india. in the supreme court case, last mentioned, their lordships have summarised the three conditions for the application of the second part of section 45 of the insurance act. they are : (a) the statement must be on a material matter or must suppress facts ..... whose suit for the recovery of the amount on an insurance policy has been dismissed by the trial court. the insurance was originally taken with the indian mercantile insurance company ltd., but subsequently the life insurance corporation of india took over the management of all the life insurance companies including the indian mercantile company ltd., with effect from 1st september, 1956, and hence the defendant, life insurance corporation of india, is held liable for the claim. the original policy which bears the no. 36348 with the indian mercantile insurance company ltd. was for an amount of rs. ..... that she had ever been in any hospital for treatment. in reply to question no. 13(c) she has only stated that she had only two conceptions and both of them have gone full time. 43. from the discussion of this evidence, the following facts emerge : (a) the deceased, kamlabai, had conceived not less that 6 times. at the time of making the proposal she had two children living, two had died and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-31-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Cal557,[1971]41CompCas234(Cal),1970CriLJ1635
R.N. Dutt, J.1. The petitioner is on his trial before a Special Court at Alipore for an alleged offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The instant case was allotted to the Special Court by a notification of the State Government and the Special Court took cognizance on a petition of complaint filed before it by the Public Prosecutor. The petitioner raised an objection before the Special Court that the Special Court had no jurisdiction to try the instant case. But the Judge presiding over the Special Court has found that he has jurisdiction. The petitioner has thereafter obtained this Rule for quashing the proceeding pending before the Special Court against him.3. The allegations are in short as follows:--3-A. The petitioner was the Secretary of Mahasakti Samabaya Samiti, a registered Co-operative Society. While working as such Secretary the petitioner is said to have committed criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs. 14,432.92p. The Special Court will have jurisdiction ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-09-1970
Reported in : AIR1970SC1417; (1970)2SCC44; [1971]1SCR249
J.C. Shah, J.1. Messrs. A. Firpo Ltd. held as tenants premises No. 11, Government Place East, Calcutta, belonging to the Asiatic Assurance Company Ltd., under a lease dated August 6, 1941, at a monthly rental of Rs. 2,000. The rent was increased by mutual agreement with effect from November 1953 to Rs. 2,800 per month. Messrs. A. Firpo Ltd. had sublet a major part of the premises to five different tenants and the aggregate rent received from the sub-tenants amounted to Rs. 4,520.2. The Corporation of Calcutta assessed the annual value of the premises at Rs. 32,076 for six years prior to April 1, 1955. With effect from April 1, 1955, the Corporation assessed the annual value of the premises at Rs. 62,761. The objection raised by the owner against the determination of annual value was rejected by the Special Officer of the Corporation. In appeal by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (which had statutorily acquired the rights of the owner) the Court of Small Causes assessed Rs. 30,24...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-05-1970
Reported in : AIR1971Delhi141
1. The Bombay Cooperative Societies Act, 1925 (as extended to Delhi) (hereinafter called the Act) is a typical State enactment intended as a fairly comprehensive Code regulating the operation of Cooperative Societies. Various powers are given to the Registrar for such regulation including the power under Section 54 of the Act to decide disputes between societies and their employees. Such a power also implies to the Society or to the employees appropriate to the decision of the disputes by the Registrar. The precise nature of the dispute which can be entertained by the Registrar under Section 54 and whether the relief of reinstatement can be given by him in deciding such a dispute are question of general public importance which have arisen in the present case.2. The petitioner is a cooperative society registered under the Act. As shown by its name, its member are Consumers' Cooperative Stores. The object for which the petitioner federation was formed is to assist, aid and counsel its me...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-04-1970
Reported in : AIR1971AP41; [1971]41CompCas814(AP)
Obul Reddi, J.1. The defendant the Life Insurance Corporation of India, represented by its Divisional Manager Machilipatnam, is the appellant. The Subordinate Judge Machilipatnam, decreed the suit brought by the widow of the insured against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 53,100/- being the total amount due under five life insurance policies.2. B. Venkateswarlu, the husband of the plaintiff insured his life under Policy Nos 12807645, 12876162, 12881223, 12882042 and 12999925085 for Rs.10,000/- Rs. 5,000/- on 1-1-56, 11-111-58, 17-7-1959 and 12-10-59 respectively at Machilipatnam and nominated his wife, the plaintiff as the person entitled to the amounts due under the policies in the event of her surviving him. Venkastewarlu died on 23-4-1961 at his village Viswanathapalli, the cause, according to the plaintiff, being 'loose motions and vomitings'. The plaintiff, thereafter, intimating the death of her husband, asked for claim forms and, on receipt of those forms, she duly fi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-13-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Cal513,[1971]41CompCas603(Cal)
S.K. Mukherjea, J.1. The question which has to be decided in this appeal is whether a nominee under a life insurance policy can validly assign the claim in respect of the policy after the holder of the policy dies but before the policy matures. It also raises a larger question namely whether a nominee can assign the claim under the policy or surrender the policy at all.2. One Narayan Chandra Ghosh, a person considerably advanced in age, took out a policy of insurance on January 24, 1947, by payment of a single premium of Rupees 15,000/-. Under the policy a sum of Rs. 33,000/- was payable on January 17, 1978 to the assured or his nominees, executors, administrators or other representatives-in-interest as the case might be. It is not without significance that the moneys payable under the policy were payable not on the death of the assured but at a fixed date. Moreover, as only one single premium was payable there was no question of premiums ceasing to be payable on the death of the assur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-08-1970
Reported in : [1971]80ITR701(All)
V.G. Oak, C.J. 1. This reference purports to have been made under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the case is in fact governed by the Income-tax Acts 1961. We may, therefore, dispose of the reference as one made under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Jaswant Rai Churamani, assessee, is an individual. The assessment year is 1962-63. The accounting period ended on March 31, 1962. In the year 1962, the assessee took out an insurance policy from the Life Insurance Corporation of India. The sum assured was Rs. 25,000. The assessee had to pay five annual premiums of Rs. 4,687'50. As required under the insurance policy, the assessee paid the Corporation the sum of Rs. 4,687.50 in March, 1962. The assessee claimed rebate for the sum of Rs. 4,687 as premium paid under the insurance policy. The claim for rebate was disallowed by the Income-tax Officer. His view was upheld in appeal b...
Tag this Judgment!