Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-21-2001
Reported in : (2002)172CTR(P& H)98; [2002]254ITR404(P& H)
Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.1. In these six references under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question has been referred to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in affirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax holding that the income from the paying clinic should be taxed under the head 'Profit or gains of profession' and not under the head 'Salary'?'2. Counsel for the parties have referred to the facts in I. T. R. No. 47 of 1985. These may be briefly noticed.3. Dr. (Mrs.) Usha Verma was employed with the Government Medical College, Rohtak. She filed her income-tax return for the year 1980-81 and declared a total income of Rs. 52,160. This included the income of Rs. 32,985 received by the assessee from the pay clinic. A deduction of Rs. 13,100 was claimed as deduction from Rs. 32,985 on account of expenses.4. The Assessing Officer-disallowed the deduction and held that the taxable income was Rs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-21-2001
Reported in : AIR2002P& H25
Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.1. Does the film 'Gadar' give the petitioner a cause to complain? Should the screening of this film be stopped because a section of the society is alleged to have 'reacted strongly against certain scenes'? This is the core of the controversy in this case First, the facts.2. The petitioner is a young Sikh scholar. He claims to be aware of the history, scriptures and religious tenents of the Sikhs. He alleges that the film 'Gadar' has scenes, which offend the religious susceptibilities of the Sikhs. It depicts the horrors of partition of 1947. The story as given in the film is 'the figment of the imagination of the story writer of the film and the director'. It 'maligns the religious symbol of the Sikh faith,tradition' and defames the Amritdhari Sikhs and Nihang Singhs. The 'Nishan Sahib,' a holy symbol has been 'misused for an ignoble purpose'. It has been used 'for the purpose of looting, plundering and rape which is against the Sikh traditions' and history. The fi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-28-2001
Reported in : AIR2001P& H344
V.K. Bali, J.1. The Act to amend and consolidate lawrelating to tenancy of agricultural lands and to providefor certain measures of land reforms inclusive of acquisition of proprietary rights by tenants called as thePepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955(here-in-after referred to as the 'Act of 1955') cameinto being on March 6, 1955. A tenant, who is not liable to be ejected under clauses (a) and (b) of sub- section (1) of Section 7-A or under clauses (a) and (b) ofsub-section (2) of Section 7-A, was for the first time,given right to acquire proprietary rights. Primarily,such tenants were those who were not occupying theland reserved by landowner for his personal cultivation. 2. Appellants, who were tenants of big landowner Bhag Singh, on introduction of Act of 1955, thought that a piece of land occupied by them for number of years would now be owned by them. Luck has smiled on them and their status would change from mere tillers of land to landowners, in their pursuit to becom...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-29-2001
Reported in : [2002]110CompCas610(P& H)
V.K. Jhanji, J.1. This civil revision has been filed against order dated 3.11.2001 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jallandhar whereby application of the petitioners under Order VII Rules 1 and 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for rejection of plaint was dismissed.2. Succintly slating, facts of the case are that M/s. Standard Electricals Limited was originaly incorporated on 10.1.1958 as 'Indo Asian Traders Private Limited' under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. Firstly, its name was changed to M/s. A.I. Switchgears Ltd. and again to the present name, M/s. Standard Electricals Limited. The Company is presently engaged in business of manufacture and marketing of electrical switchgears. The authorised share capital of the Company is stated to be Rs. 6 Crores and its one share is worth Rs. 10/-. It was being run by Mr. J.K. Gupta and Mr. J.M. Goyal till 1994 when the Company transferred its share to the extent of 60 per cent to M/s. Havell India Limited (for sho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-19-2001
Reported in : AIR2002P& H147
M.M. Kumar, J.1. This is a plaintiff-appellant's (for brevity 'the plaintiff) second appeal directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Karnal dt. 6.3.1980. The Additional Dist. Judge, Karnal in his judgment partially agreed with the findings recorded by the Sub Judge, 2nd Class, Karnal on 13.2.1979. The relief claimed in the suit was that the registered sale deed dated 9.2.1976 executed by the plaintiff-appellant in favour of the defendant-respondent (for brevity 'the defendant') for a period of 99 years be declared as null and void and thus not binding on the plaintiff-appellant. As a consequence of the declaration, further relief claimed was that the plaintiff be given possession of agricultural land measuring 241 kanal 12 marlas situated in village Bhauji, Tehsil and District Karnal, as described in the plaint.2. The case set up by the plaintiff is that she is the owner of the suit land measuring 241 kanals 12 marlas situated in village Bhauji,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-28-2001
Reported in : (2004)136PLR287
M.M. Kumar, J.1. This appeal under Clause x of the Letters Patent is directed against judgment dated 25.10.1985 rendered by the learned Single Judge in RFA No. 390 of 1975 vide which the learned Single Judge has rejected the claim of the appellant S.A. Jain College Trust, Ambala City or apportionment of compensation in respect of the land acquired vide notification No. 6605-EDI/13595 dated 15.5.1968 read with notification Nos. 4034-EDI/69/14965 dated 11.6.1969 and No. 10244/EDI/69/20482 dated 13.8.1969 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'). The claim of the appellant for apportionment under Section 30 of the Act was rejected earlier by the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala, vide his order dated 30.12.1974.2. This case is a classical illustration of miseries heaped on a migrant resulting from the allotment of evacuee land. This historical and unique exodus following the partition of the country in 1947 resulted into enactment of va...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-29-2001
Reported in : AIR2002P& H108
Adarsh Kumar Gael, J.1. Following substantial questions of law are involved in this appeal;-(i) Whether mortgagee was entitled to a decree of declaration that he had become owner and was entitled to possession on the around that right of redemption had come to an end by afflux of time.(ii) Whether the terms of mortgage permitting interest at rate equal to income from the land on a part of the principal amount and interest at the rate of Re. 1 and 9 annas % per month on rest of the amount were hit by provisions of Usurious Loans Act, 1918, and Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934, and further whether such provisions were in the nature of clog on equity of redemption and on that account were liable to be modified:(iii) Whether the Court could require, in its discretion that the procedure for foreclosure may be followed before the declaration of title in favour of a mortgagee can be granted if it appears the Court to be necessary to do so having regard to the facts of the case.2. The r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-13-2001
Reported in : 2001(78)ECC578
Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.1. A pub is normally the hub. The government of Haryana seems to recognize this truth. It has given a licence to respondent No. 5. The petitioner feel aggrieved. They allege that the respondent is rot eligible. They pray that the order dated July 10, 2001 passed by the Commissioner be annulled. The short question is - Has the authority erred in providing a 'Bar' for the people of Hissar?2. First, the relevant facts.A wine contractor and two residents of Hissar are the petitioner; in these two cases. The 5th respondent viz. M/s Lido Restaurant is the common target. It is alleged that the said restaurant does not have the 'facilities or clientele at par with those available in restaurants attached to three-star hotels and duly approved by the Hotels and Restaurants Approval and Classification Committee'. Thus, it does not conform to the requirements of Para 41(i) of the Excise Policy for the year 2001-2002 for the grant of L-4 and L-5 licences. The respondent does no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-24-2001
Reported in : ECN:2001(2)RCR212
R.L. Anand, J.1. Shri Madan Lal has filed the present revision and it has been directed against the judgment dated 3.10.1980 passed by the Court of learned Rent Controller, Bhiwani, who dismissed the application of the petitioner under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code by holding that the order of ejectment passed by the learned Rent Controller on 14th March, 1978 has merged with the order of appellate authority passed on 14th February, 1979.2. Some facts can be noticed in the following manner:Smt. Sumitra Devi respondent filed an ejectment petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against Shri Madan Lal. The petitioner herein was proceeded ex parte and after recording the ex-parte proof, the learned Rent Controller vide order dated 14th March, 1978passed the ejectment order directing the tenant to filed vacate the demised premises. Against this order, the tenant-petitioner filed at the first instan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-01-2001
Reported in : (2001)168CTR(P& H)153; [2001]249ITR728(P& H)
V.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. Some concepts of legal jurisprudence are of perennial interest. Discussion about these is always refreshing. The rule about 'natural justice' is one such concept. Its basic tenets are impartial adjudication and fair hearing. The abovementioned two principles of natural justice, viz., audi alteram partem and nemo judex in causa sua potest, have been used in common law. The first is used to denote the principle that both sides in a case must be heard. The second concept suggests that no one can be a judge of his own case. This precludes bias of any kind. In other words, it is necessary that his case is heard by a judge who is free from bias. Bias disqualifies an individual from acting as an adjudicator.2. In the case of A. K. Kraipak v. Union of India : [1970]1SCR457 , the Supreme Court observed (page 155) : 'The real questionis not whether he was biased. It is difficult to prove the state of mind of a person. Therefore, what we have to see is whether there is reason...
Tag this Judgment!