Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-22-1977
Reported in : AIR1978Delhi146; 14(1978)DLT132
V.S. Deshpande, J.1. These two appeals against the order of a learned single Judge holding that the High Court of Delhi has jurisdiction to entertain the applications made by the respondents under S. 51-A of the Designs Act, 1911 (as amended) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), have been referred to the Full Bench for a fuller consideration of this important question of jurisdiction than it received in the order of the learned single Judge under appeal or in the judicial decisions relied upon and followed by the learned single Judge.2. The respondents in these two appeals each filed a petition under S. 51-A of the Act on the following averments supplemented by oral arguments:-A. Both the respondents and the appellant are carrying on the same trade at Delhi. B. The appellant has got two designs 131357 and 131364 registered in the Register of Designs maintained under Section 46 of the Act. C. These designs had, however, been published in India in respect of laces prior to the date of r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-16-1977
Reported in : AIR1978SC449; (1978)1SCC520; [1978]2SCR433; [1978]42STC31(SC)
Beg, C.J.1. I am in general agreement with my learned brother Chandrachud who has discussed all the authorities so admirably and comprehensively. I, however, would like to add a few observations stating the general conclusion, as I see it. emerging from an application of general principles and accumulation of case law on the subject of what may be called 'statutory' or 'compulsory' sales. Are they sales at all so as to be exigible to sales tax or purchase tax under the relevant statutory provisions 2. The term 'sale' is defined as follows in Eenjamin on Sale (Eighth Edn.) :To constitute a valid sale there must be a concurrence of the following elements, namely :-(1) parties competent to contract; (2) mutual assent; (3) a thing, the absolute or general property in which istransferred from the seller to the buyer; and(4) a price in money paid or promised.3. It is true that a considerable part of the field over which what are called 'sales' take place under either regulatory orders or lev...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-08-1977
Reported in : AIR1978SC68; (1977)4SCC608; [1978]2SCR1
Beg, C.J.1. 'India, that is Bharat, shall be union of States'. The very first mandate of the first article of our Constitution to which we owe allegiance thus prohibits, by necessary implication, according to the plaintiff in the original suit now before us under Article 121 of the Constitution of India, any constitutionally unjustifiable trespass by the Union Government upon the domain of the powers of the States. The State of Karnataka, has, therefore, sued for a declaration that a notification dated 23-5-1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'The Central Notification') constituting a Commission of Inquiry in purported exercise of its powers under Section 3 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is illegal and ultra-vires. This declaration is sought on one of two alternative grounds : firstly, that the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, does not 'authorise the Central Government to constitute a Commission of Inquiry in regard to matters falling excl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-07-1977
Reported in : 1979CENCUS332
ORDERMohan, J.1. This writ petition coming on for hearing on Thursday, the third day of November 1977 and on this day upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof, the order of the High Court dated 2.5.1975 and made herein, and the Counter affidavit filed herein and the records relating to the order in No. 4496 of 1974, dated 23.9.76 on the file of the 1st respondent and comprised in the return of respondents herein to the Writ made by the High Court, and upon hearing the argument of Mr. K. C. Rajappa Advocate for the petitioner, and of Mr. T. Chengalvarayan Central Government standing counsel on behalf of the respondents, the Court made the followingorder:The short facts leading to this writ petition are as follows: On 7.1.1972, officers attached to the Madras Customs House searched a room in the premises No. 41, Kalathi Pillai Street, Madras-1, which was under the occupation of the petitioner, in execution of a search warrant No. 86/72 dated 7.4.1972. The sea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-25-1977
Reported in : AIR1978AP242
Samasiva Rao, J.1. In the three writ petitions a common question of some legal complexity arises. This complexity is deepened by seemingly different views expressed by learned Judges of this Court and some other High Courts. That was why our learned brother Jeeevan Reddy. J. referred W. P. No. 4527 of 1975 to a Division Bench and our learned brother Madhava Reddy, J. did the same with W. P. No. 3238 of 1976. In the other writ petition the same question arises.2. In all the three petitions the alienations of lands have been set aside by the Special Deputy Collector under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation of 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulation'). The lands are situated in Scheduled Areas. The Regulation as extended to the Telengana Area on and from 1-12-1963. Though the dates differ from case to case, there were contracts of sale in respect of lands in Scheduled areas by tribals in favour of the petitioners, who are not tribals, before 1-12-1963. So...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-29-1977
Reported in : ILR1978Delhi327; 1978RLR442
V.D. Misra, J. (1) This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeals Nos. 201, 225, 238, 241, 250, 251, 252 and 283 of 1975 since these arise from the same facts.(2) The salient facts of the case as disclosed by the record are that on December 4, 1973 Dr. N. S. Jain, a well-known Eye Specialist of Delhi, came back to his house No. D-29L defense Colony, New Delhi, at about 7-15 P.M. He asked his wife Vidya Jain to get ready for a visit to his sister residing in C-489, defense Colony. They were to go in their fiat car No. Dlv 4847 which was parked near the ga,te of the adjoining house No. D-292. After a few minutes the couple came out of the house. While Dr. Jain med towards the right of the car to open' its door his wife proceeded towards its left. Before Dr. Jain could unlock the door he noticed that his wife was missing. He went to the left side of the car and saw a prostrate figure lying in the nearby storm water drain. Just then a man jumped out of the drain, flourished a pistol at Dr....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-28-1977
Reported in : 13(1977)DLT334; 1978RLR476
Prithvi Raj, J.(1) This first appal is directed against the order dated 28th April, 1970, passed by a learned Single Judge setting aside award dated 10th June, 1965, on the ground that the arbitrators had 'failed to control and conclude the proceedings' which were commenced on or about 30th June, 1961, and that the arbitrators were guilty cf having misconducted themselves and the proceedings in that without affording proper opportunity to the claimant taking advantage of his absence, had made and announced the award in question. In that view of the matter, it was not considered feasible to remit the proceedings to the same arbitrators. The learned Single Judge superseded the reference on the ground that the procedure prescribed by Article 64 of the General Conditions of Contract was 'not only cumbersome but wholly illusory and was not intended to inspire confidence between the parties'. As a consequence the learned Single Judge held that the arbitration agreement 'will cease to have ef...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-19-1977
Reported in : AIR1977SC2328; (1977)GLR919; (1977)0GLR90; 1977LabIC1857; (1977)4SCC193; [1978]1SCR423
..... c) nor in any other section of the government of india act was the word 'transfer' used or such a power conferred in terms on the governor general.139. now let me examine the relevant provisions of the constitution of ..... been better if the chief justice of india had produced the letter; particularly when the privilege of confidentiality was withdrawn by its authors, for that would have helped to clear the position of the three judges ..... close, there was a rapprochement move, the political party now in office at the union level reportedly having repeatedly stated at the 'hustings' to borrow the words of shri seervai, counsel for ..... , that is to say, if the words are semantically ambiguous, or if a provision, if read literally, is patently incompatible with the other provisions of that instrument, the court would be justified in construing the words in a manner ..... which are influenced by one-sided governmental considerations are outside the contemplation of our constitution.39. it may not be a happy analogy, but it is commonsense that he who ..... be exercised whimsically or arbitrarily. in the case of chandramouleshwar prasad v. patna high court and ors. : [1970]2scr666 , while interpreting the word 'consultation' as appearing in article 233 of the constitution this court ..... its independence. if adequate safeguards are provided for to examine individual cases on merits by an impartial and independent body, the matter may be different.144. learned attorney general argued that to impose the condition .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-15-1977
Reported in : [1983]139ITR479(AP)
Ramachandra Raju, J. 1. The reference is made under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', at the instance of the Addl. CIT, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. The question referred for the decision of this court is, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 30,000 and Rs. 20,000 received by the respondent-assessee from M/s. Biological Products (P) Ltd., respectively, during the periods relevant to assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68 are not taxable. 2. The assessee is a qualified chemist, who was initially in the service of a Swiss firm as a chief chemist. He had acquired considerable experience, knowledge and know-how in the manufacture of drugs including, INH and Dapsone for fighting T.B. and Leprosy, respectively. He left the services of the Swiss firm in the year 1960 and took up employment with M/s. Biological Product (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the company'). Under an agreement dated Aug...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-22-1977
Reported in : (1978)80BOMLR73
S.K. Desai, J.1. This is a pure infringement action instituted by the plaintiff company, which is the proprietor of Trade Mark No, 214336 in Class 5 which consists of the word 'BUTACORTINDON' registered in respect of medical and pharmaceutical preparations as of March 16, 1963. The defendants are a firm which also is a manufacturer of pharmaceutical preparations and have been the proprietors of Trade Mark No. 224322 consisting of the word 'BUTACORT' registered in Class 5 in respect of the pharmaceutical preparation for sale to the hospitals of the Government of Gujarat. This was pursuant to an order of the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks dated September 12, 1967. In the suit the plaintiffs complain of the defendants' efforts to sell their pharmaceutical preparation under the trade mark BUTACORT to persons other than the hospitals of the Government of Gujarat. It is submitted that such action amounts to an infringement of the plaintiffs' registered trade mark No. 214336. According to th...
Tag this Judgment!