Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-26-1981
Reported in : AIR1982P& H228
S.S. Sandhawalia, C.J. 1. Whether a Society registered under the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, which in essence is an instrumentality or agency of the State, would become amenable to the writ jurisdiction under the provisions of Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, is the meaningful question which has necessitated this reference to the Full Bench. Inevitably at issue in this context is the necessary elaboration or qualification of the ratio of the earlier Full Bench case in Ajmer Singh v. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Punjab, AIR 1961 Punj & Har 107.2. The facts deserve notice only in so far as they are relevant to the pristine issue aforesaid. The Punjab State Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank Std. respondent No. 3 (hereinafter called 'the Mortgage Bank') is an Apex Society, which on the petitioner's own showing is registered under the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. Pritam Singh Gill, the writ petitioner was originally appointed as a Legal Assistant in the Mortgage...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-04-1981
Reported in : [1982]49STC56(P& H)
I.S. Tiwana, J.1. The petitioner impugns the notice dated 16th June, 1972 (annexure A to the petition), issued by the Assessing Authority, Ludhiana, primarily on the ground that the same is barred by time as envisaged by Sub-section (4) of Section 11 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. In order to appreciate the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner it is but necessary to refer to the relevant parts of this section :Section 11. (1) If the Assessing Authority is satisfied without requiring the presence of dealer or the production by him of any evidence that the returns furnished in respect of any period are correct and complete, he shall assess the amount of tax due from the dealer on the basis of such returns.(2) If the Assessing Authority is not satisfied without requiring the presence of dealer who furnished the returns or production of evidence that the returns furnished in respect of any period are correct and complete, he shall serve on such dealer a notice in the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-17-1981
Reported in : (1981)25CTR(P& H)94; [1983]140ITR490(P& H)
J.V. Gupta, J.1. These two references Nos. 66 and 67 of 1975, arising out of an order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (hereinafter called ' the Tribunal'), dated September 3, 1974, have been made under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, at the instance of both the parties, that is, the assessee as well as the Revenue. The Tribunal has referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court, vide its order dated June 17, 1975 :' (i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the order of the Additional Commissioner instead of remitting the case to him for a fresh decision on the matter by him ?(ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the action of the Income-tax Officer in recording the impugned certificate of registration could not be said to be erroneous on account of distribution of loss by the assessee-firm in a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-17-1981
Reported in : AIR1982P& H262
Prem Chand Jain, J. 1. The facts of this case may briefly be stated thus :Chandgi, respondent, owned 44 standard acres and 15-1/4 units of land in the revenue estate of village Jatola, tehsil and district Sonepat, on 15th Apr., 1953. Out of this land, 4 bighas and 4 biswas of land was under a dohlidar tenant and 6 bighas and 7 biswas of land was under old tenants on 15th Apr., 1953. There is no dispute that the area with the dohlidar tenant and the old tenants had to be excluded while determining the surplus area of Chandgi. On 10th Dec. 1957, Chandgi sold away 19 standard acres and 6-1/2 units of land to one Teka of village Mandora through a registered sale deed. Attar Singh son of Chandgi filed a suit to pre-empt the sale made in favour of Teka. A decree for possession by pre-emption was passed in favour of Attar Singh on 14th Jan. 1959.2. The surplus area case of Chandgi was taken up by the Collector and on 26th Nov. 1959, 14 standard acres and 15-1/4 units of land was declared surp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-28-1981
Reported in : AIR1982P& H55
S.S. Sandhawalia, C.J.1. Whether the unauthorised permanent conversion of verandahs into rooms and the installation of a door by a tenant, are acts likely to impair materially the value or utility of the demised premises within the meaning of Section 13(2)(iii) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, is the somewhat interesting question which has necessitated this reference to the Division Bench.2. At the revisional stage the matrix of facts giving rise to the aforesaid issue are not in serious dispute and may, therefore, be briefly noticed. Narain Singh petitioner (now deceased) had preferred a petition for ejectment against Messrs. Bakson Laboratories and its sole proprietor Shri R L. Soni from Bungalow No. 456-L, Model Town, Jullundur. Amongst various other grounds it was specifically alleged that the respondent had covered the verandahs on the front and back sides of the bungalow and had opened a door by breaking a wall of a room and thus diminished the value and utili...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-06-1981
Reported in : (1981)23CTR(P& H)10; [1982]135ITR593(P& H)
S.P. Goyal, J. 1. The assessee, a registered firm, is engaged in the manufacture and sale of sewing unchines, lathes, milling machines, drills, chaff cutting machines, machinery casting and assembling of radios. In the revised return filed for the assessment year 1961-62, it declared its income at Rs. 68,331. During the assessment proceedings the ITO discovered that a surprise raid was conducted by the sales tax authorities on the premises of the assessee and during the search Uchanti Bahi containing record of the transactions of purchase and sale, which were not shown in its account books, was also seized. When called upon to produce this Uchanti Bahi, the assessee showed its inability to do so and alleged that the same was lost while returning from the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jullundur, on April 8, 1963. He, however, produced certified copies of the extracts made from that Bahi by the sales tax authorities which showed sales and purchases to the tune of Rs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Oct-09-1981
Reported in : AIR1982P& H188
1. Whether a sale or any other alienation made during the currency of the consolidation, without obtaining permission of the Consolidation Officer, would be void between the parties to the transaction, in view of S. 30 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act. 1948, is the sole question of law of somewhat significant importance which arises in these two appeals, R. S. A. Nos. 822 and 823 of 1970.2. Mam Chand was owner of certain agricultural land in village Badasa, tahsil Jhajjar, district Rohtak. In 1960, consolidation proceedings started in the village and the land held by Mam Chand was put in hotch-pot and during consolidation he was allotted 71 Kanals 10 Marlas comprised in Khasra Numbers detailed in para 1 of the plaints. After the allotment was made to him of the said 71 Kanals 10 Marlas, on 9th Oct, 1961, Mam Chand sold by two separate registered sale deeds for Rs. 10,000/- each, half of the land to Siri Kishan and others, plaintiffs in thi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-18-1981
Reported in : AIR1982P& H108
M.R. Sharma, J.1. The petitioners are firms and companies carrying, on the business of rice milling and selling rice at Karnal. They purchase paddy, shell it in their shellers and produce rice, 90% of which has to be compulsorily made over to the State Government under the Haryana Rice Procurement Levy Order and the remaining 10% of the rice is sold in the open market. The petitioners purchased paddy, in the months of October and November, 1980, at the rate of Rupees 105/- per quintal which is the procurement price fixed by the Government.2. In the process of manufacture of rice from paddy, first of all rice husk is removed and the rice is subjected to polishing by which process rice bran is produced. This rice bran is used for various purposes like extraction of oil and the manufacture of poultry feed. The current price of the rice bran, according to the petitioners, was Rs.120/- per quintal on the date of the filing of the petition.3. On Jan, 27, 1981, the Haryana State promulgated t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-16-1981
Reported in : AIR1982P& H439
Prem Chand Jain, J.1. Shri Hardwari Lal has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India Calling in question the legality and constitutional validity of Haryana Ordinance No. 5 of 1980 (hereinafter called the Ordinance) and the Maharshi Dayanand University (Amendment) Act, 1980 (Haryana Act No. 40 of 1980) (hereinafter called the Amendment Act) and has also prayed for issuance of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 to renew his term as Vice-Chancellor of the Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak (hereinafter called the University).2. In order to appreciate the controversy, it is generally appropriate to give details of the allegation made in the petition, but so far as the present petition is concerned, I find that it may not be possible to do so at this stage and it would suffice if a few facts are mentioned as a preface, which are to the following effect :--3. Shri Hardwari Lal, petitioner, was appointed as Vice-Chancellor of the University on Oct., 1977. The pet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-23-1981
Reported in : AIR1981P&H213
S.S. Sandhawalia, C.J.1. Whether a company for whose benefit land is acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, can be impleaded as a party in the Court of the District Judge in a reference preferred under Section 18 of the Act aforesaid is the meaningful issue which has necessitated this reference to the Full Bench.2. Undoubtedly there was a sharp divergence of judicial opinion on the aforesaid issue. However, it appears to me that a recent judgment of their Lordships in Himalaya Tiles and Marble (P) Ltd. v. Francis Victor Coutinha, AIR 1980 SC 1118, to which a detailed reference follows hereinafter has now cut the Gordian knot cleanly in favour of the petitioner-company.3. For an issue so pristinely legal, the particular facts would ultimately pale into insignificance. However, it is apt to briefly outline the matrix there of which has given rise to these twelve revision petitions now before us. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the issue being ide...
Tag this Judgment!