Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jun-17-1980
Reported in : AIR1981Guj15; (1981)0GLR206
Sheth, J.1. The Petitioner is the Executive Trustee of Consumer Education and Research Centre (hereinafter referred to as the 'Centre' for the sake of brevity) at Ahmedabad. He has filed this petition as a citizen of India and also in his capacity as the Executive Trustee. The Centre published a study entitled 'A fraud on policy-holder'. It is not disputed that it was a scientific research made into the working of the Life Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation' for the sake of brevity). This study tried to portray and establish the discriminatory practices which the Corporation is alleged to have adopted and which adversely affect a large number of policy-holders their investment policies, their expense ratio, availability of term insurance and other cognate matters. Mr. N. C. Krishnan who is a Director of the Corporation wrote a reply to it. His reply was published in The Hindu on 6th November 1978. In that reply, he tried to challenge the conclusions reco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-14-1980
Reported in : [1980(41)FLR199]; (1981)ILLJ462Bom
Mohta, J.1. Point of some importance regarding the applicability of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, ('Bonus Act' for short) to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, is involved in the present petition.2. To discuss the core question, it will be necessary to notice some basic facts and so also the background, which is as under :3. Two trade unions, viz., Maharashtra Veej Mandal Nokar Sangh and the Maharashtra Veej Mandal Kamgar Sangh demanded bonus for the years 1965-66 to 1969-70 at 20% of the annual earnings in terms of the Bonus Act and this led to a reference under S. 10(1)(d) read with S. 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, by the State Government for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal. The Petitioner-Board took the stand that the Bonus Act does not apply to it in view of the exemption granted under S. 32 of the Bonus Act. On quantum of the claim, the stand was that there was no 'available surplus' and nothing beyond the minimum prescribed could be given After ransa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-25-1980
Reported in : [1982]134ITR158(AP)
..... of the following financial institutions, namely:- (a) a state financial corporation established under the state financial corporation act, 1951 (63 of 1951); (b) the industrial development bank of india, established under the industrial development bank of india act, 1964 (19 of 1964); (c) the madras industrial and investment corporation of india ltd.; (d) the re-finance corporation for industry ltd.; (e) the life insurance corporation of india established under the life insurance corporation act, 1956 (31 of 1956); (ii) 'tax' means - (a) income-tax or super tax ..... assessment year, of its paid up share capital and of its reserve, if any, created under the proviso (b) to clause (vi) of sub-section (2) of section 10 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under sub-section (3) of section 34 of the income-tax act, 1961 (43 of 1961), and of its other reserves in so far as the amounts credited to such other reserves have not been allowed in computing its profits for the purposes ..... objective of rapid industrialisation by attracting otherwise qualified entrepreneurs but (who are) only starved of finances. there is no warrant for limiting the scope of the expression 'capital employed' by excluding therefrom borrowings by or advances made to the assessees, in the application of s. 80j. in so far as r. 19a(3) directs that borrowings of and debts due by the assessee should be excluded from the capital employed is contrary to the intendment of s. 80j. in so providing it does not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jan-14-1980
Reported in : 1980CriLJ494
T.S. Misra, J.1. In the instant revision the learned single Judge felt that the law laid down in Madho Ram v. State 1966 All WR HC 421 needs reconsideration. The following question has thus been referred to us:Whether a Co-operative Society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, is a body created by or under State law within the meaning of sub-clause Twelfth of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code ?Sub-clause Twelfth of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code reads as follows:Twelfth-Every person-(a) in the service or pay of the Government or remunerated by fee or commission for the performance of any public duty by the Government;(b) in the service or pay of a local authority a corporation established by or under a Central, Provincial or State Act or a Government Company as defined in Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. In view of the wordings of sub-clause (b) of sub-clause 12th of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code, we have reframed the question as under:Whether a Co-opera...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-23-1980
Reported in : (1981)1MLJ452
V. Sethuraman, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the judgment of the learned Fourth Assistant Judge, City civil Court, Madras, in O.S. No. 4534 of 1972. The plaintiff submitted its tender in response to an advertisement issued by the first defendant, for purchase of four items of Nutmegs with shell, Nutmegs without shell, Maco and Betelnuts. The total amount for which the plaintiff tendered came to Rs. 4,44,867. The plaintiff sent a demand draft for Rs. 44,487 being ten per cent of the value of the goods agreed to be purchased by him. The first defendant accepted the plaintiff's offer in relation to the second item, namely Nutmegs without shell, which was stored at Bombay. Out of this amount Rs. 26,409.65 due as and by way of deposit relating to the accepted quantity of the tender was retained and the balance was refunded. As a condition precedent for taking delivery of the goods, sales-tax was demanded by the first defendant and the plaintiff protested that it was contrary to the te...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-06-1980
Reported in : [1981]129ITR829(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 226(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following question has been referred to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the computation of super-tax made by the Income-tax Officer is, in law, correct ?'2. The ITO computed the total income at Rs. 2,18,81,633, in accordance with the provisions of the First Schedule in Part 2, Para. D of the Finance Act, 1964. The ITO calculated the super-tax chargeable from the company on the whole of the total income at 55%. In accordance with prov. (iii)(B), the ITO allowed rebate of 26% on Rs. 11,06,977 being that part of the total income as was attributable to the manufacture of articles specified in the list in Part IV of the Schedule and at 20% on the balance of the total income amounting to Rs. 2,07,62,199. Thus, against the corporation tax of Rs. 1,20,29,946.90 calculated at the rate of 55% of the total income, a rebate in corporation tax was calculated at Rs. 44...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Aug-29-1980
Reported in : AIR1981Ori18; 50(1980)CLT605
..... an order for removal from service contrary to regulations framed under the oil and natural gas commission act, 1959; the industrial finance corporation act, 1948; and the life insurance corporation act, 1956 would enable the employees to a declaration against the statutory corporation of continuance in service or would only give rise to a claim for damages; secondly, whether an employee of a statutory corporation was entitled to claim protection of articles 14 and 16 of the constitution against the corporation. as these were the questions for examination, the court proceeded to consider whether the corporations were authorities within the meaning of article 12 of the constitution so as to be state. in the airport authority ..... . misra, j. 1. challenge in this application under article 226 of the constitution is to the levy of holding tax raised by the notified area council of brajrajnagar (hereafter referred to as the 'council) in respect of the holdings of the petitioner located within the jurisdiction of the council. petitioner-company also challenges the demand of licence fee under section 290 of the orissa municipal act of 1950.2. petitioner -- western coalfield limited -- is a subsidiary company of coal india limited which is a government company within the meaning of section 617 of the companies act of 1956 three collieries by the names of hemgirrampur coal .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-10-1980
Reported in : (1980)16CTR(Mad)217; [1980]123ITR464(Mad)
Sethuraman, J.1. For the assessment year 1972-73, the following question has been referred to this court under. s. 27(1) of the W.T. Act : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the debt of Rs. 36,000 owing by the assessee to the Life Insurance Corporation of India, as on the relevant valuation date, was one which was not to be deducted from the aggregate value of the assets of the assessee for computing the net taxable wealth for the assessment year 1972-73 ?' For the assessment year 1973-74, the question referred runs as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the debt of Rs. 56,485 owing by the assessee to the Life Insurance Corporation of India, as on the relevant valuation date, was one which was not to be deducted from the aggregate value of the assets of the assessee for computing the net taxable wealth for the assessment year 1973-74 ?' 2. We shall first take up for consideration the reference for the assessment year 1972-73. The assessee ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-10-1980
Reported in : ILR1980Delhi1010
S. Ranganathan, J. (1) By this writ petition, the petitioner, Chander Mohan Khanna, prays for the quashing of an order of termination of his services passed by the second respondent viz. the Secretary of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) which is the first respondent in the writ petition. On behalf of the first and second respondents, a preliminary objection has been raised as to the maintainability of this writ petition. The contention is that the first respondent is only a society registered under the Societies' Registration Act and governed by its own memorandum of association and the rules framed there under and is thereforee not amendable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court, not being the State or other authority to whom writs, or directions or orders in the nature of writs could be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution. After hearing both the counsel we have come to the conclusion that this preliminary objection has to be upheld. We, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-21-1980
Reported in : (1981)ILLJ64Mad
S. Padmanabhan, J.1. These writ petitions raise common questions for determination. In W.P. Nos. 757 & 758 of 1980, there are some special features which will be dealt with separately. It will be convenient to deal with the facts in W.P. 4386 of 1977. The petitioner is an officer working as sub-accountant in the China Bazaar Branch of the Central Bank of India Limited. The majority of the officers of the Bank as well the other staff who are styled as the Award staff are all members of the All India Central Bank Employees' Federation. The said Federation is affiliated to All India Bank Employees Association. Pursuant to the call given by the All India Central Bank Employees' Federation, the officers and award staff staged a demonstration for a duration of 30 minutes during working hours on the morning of 11-10-1977. There was a similar demonstration for 30 minutes on 17-10-1977 and for an hour on 19-11-1977. The demonstrations were held for the purpose of pressing their demands for bonu...
Tag this Judgment!