Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-24-1974
Jenkins v. Georgia - 418 U.S. 153 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Jenkins v. Georgia, 418 U.S. 153 (1974) Jenkins v. Georgia No. 73-557 Argued April 15, 1974 Decided June 24, 1974 418 U.S. 153 APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA Syllabus Appellant was convicted, prior to the announcement of Miller v. California, 413 U. S. 15 , and companion cases, of violating Georgia's obscenity statute for showing the film "Carnal Knowledge" in a motion picture theater. The jury had been instructed on obscenity under that statute, which defines obscene material in terms similar to the definition in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413 , 383 U. S. 418 . The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. Held: 1. Appellant, whose conviction was on appeal at the time of the announcement of Miller, is entitled to any benefit available thereunder. Hamling v. United States, ante, p. 418 U. S. 87 . P. 418 U. S. 155 . 2. There is no constitutional requirement that juries be instructed in sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-19-1974
Reported in : AIR1975P& H1
Muni Lal Verma, J.1. The appellant filed Civil Writ Petition No. 1146 of 1966, in this Court against the order of the Financial Commissioner, which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge on November 27, 1970. Against that judgment the appellant filed, an appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent on December 23, 1970. The Deputy Registrar raised certain objections, including that it was not accompanied by three sell of typed copies of documents as required by Rule 3 of Chapter 2-C of the High Court Rules and Orders, Vol. V, and ordered its return to the learned counsel for the appellant for removing the defects and to refile it within a week. The order for return was passed on December 23, 1970, but it has not been possible to ascertain as to on which date the learned counsel or his clerk took it back from the Court. However, after removing the defects pointed out by the Deputy Registrar, the appeal was refiled on January 30, 1971. No objection was then taken by the Deputy Registrar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-29-1974
Reported in : [1976]105ITR115(Guj)
B.K. Mehta J.1. This reference raises a shorts but interesting question about the powers of the Tribunal under section 35 of the Wealth-tax Act. Though the question is a short one its application has always posed problems before courts. Shortly stated, the facts leading to this reference are as under : The relevant assessment year was 1963-64 and the valuation date was December 31, 1962. The return was filed by the assessee, who is the applicant before us on 19th (sic) 1963. The assessee claimed exemption in respect of the jewellery on the ground that they were articles meant for personal use of the assessee and, therefore, not liable to be included within the net wealth of the assessee under section 5(1)(viii) of the Wealth-tax Act before its amendment. The assessee has filed a list along with her return where two categories of jewellery were broadly mentioned; one category dealing with ornaments studded with precious stones, and the second category of golden ornaments simpliciter. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-24-1974
Reported in : AIR1976Guj53; (1976)0GLR81
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The Petitioners tenants who were in actual possession of the land in question have filed this Petition as their application under S. 32-PP of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. 1948. hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' which was made an May 29. 1971 along with the stay application against the order of surrender in landlord's favour under Section 32-P(2) was held to be incompetent and the stay application had been rejected on that ground.2.The short facts which have given rise to this petition are as under :- The petitioners tenants' purchase of the land in question was declared ineffective by the order of the A. L. T. on March 8. 1964. Thereafter the order of disposal of this land under Section 32-P(2) was made by surrendering to the landlord on August 20.1969. and that order was finally confirmed by this Court. Meanwhile Section 32-PP having been enacted with effect from December 29. 1965. the petitioners exercised their option to purchase this land by ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-20-1974
Reported in : AIR1975SC1146; (1975)1SCC166; [1975]2SCR774
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. Calcutta or Cochin, for the urban people of India, the shocking scarcity of a roof to rest one's tired bones is an unhappy problem of social justice that compels control of rent and eviction laws. In the case now before us, attacking the Constitutionality of legislation handcuffing the landlord-proprietariat's right of eviction, the law has to be tested not merely by the cold print of Article 19(1)(f) but also by the public concern of Article 19(5) and the compassionate animus of Article 39, Parts III and IV of the Constitution together constitute a complex of promises the nation has to keep and the legislation challenged before us is in partial fulfilment of this Iryst with the people. These observations become necessary in limine since counsel for the respondents dismissed the concept of social justice as extraneous to an insightful understanding of the section invalidated by the High Court, while we think chat judicial conscience is not a mere matter of citat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-27-1974
Reported in : AIR1975Mad131; (1975)1MLJ39
1. The third defendant in O. S. No. 33 of 1965, who is also the second defendant in O. S. No. 195 of 1963 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Coimbatore, is the appellant in these two letters patent appeals. The interesting question that arises in these appeals is whether to a case of succession to the estate of a Hindu male, who held the property as the last male-holder, the Hindu Law of Inheritance (Amendment) Act, 1929. Act 2 of 1929, is applicable or not.2. The short facts that are necessary for disposal of the appeals may be stated. One A. Kandaswami Gounder died in 1912, leaving behind him, his widow RanSammal, two sons. K. Arunachala and K. Kandaswami and three daughters Angammal, Palaniammal, and Pachiammal. Kandaswami's son K. Arunachala died issueless in 1938. After a few months K. Kandaswami also died issueless. After K. Kandaswami's death, Rangammal the mother, was in enjoyment of the joint family properties. The said Rangammal died in 1953. Thereafter, Angam...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-17-1974
Reported in : AIR1975Delhi192; 1975RLR15
T.P.S. Chawla, J.(1) The appellant, Joginder Singh, was once an advocate. His grievance is that his name has been struck off the rolls. (2) On 28th March, 1962 he was enrolled as an advocate by the Bar Council of the State of Uttar Pradesh. For a short while, he says, he practiced at Shaharanpur. He then applied to the Bar Council of India under section 18 of the Advocates Act 1961 for the transfer of his name from the roll of the U.P. Bar Council to that of the Bar Council of Delhi. This application was allowed in October 1963, and thereafter he began to practice in Delhi. (3) Pursuant to a communication received from the Deputy Registrar of the Punjab High Court, the Bar Council of India sent a notice dated 12th January, 1965 to the appellant saying : 'WHEREASit has been brought to the notice of this Council that you made an application for enrolment under the Advocates Act of 1961 to the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, that in the said application for enrolment you concealed the fact ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-12-1974
Reported in : AIR1975SC146; 1975CriLJ233; (1975)3SCC390
Y.V. Chandrachud, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment of the High Court of Calcutta quashing an Order of commitment made by the Magistrate, 1st Class, Sealdah. The appeal raises a question as to the scope and interpretation of Section 207-A, Criminal P. C, 1898.2. It would appear that on the Doljatra day which fell on March 14, 1968 communal riots broke out in Calcutta in the wake of the Holi festival. At about 2-30 p. m. on that day two boys, Sital Chandra Prodhan and Rabin Karmakar, were passing along the Kashai Bustee. They strayed into the Narkeldange North Road locality while sprinkling colours. At about 5 or 5-30 p. m. they are alleged to have been surrounded by 50 or 60 men, 10 or 12 out of which assaulted them with fists, iron rods and bricks. Rabin Karmakar is said to have been dragged along Narkeldange North Road. His dead body was found floating in the Circular Canal on March 20, 1968. Sital Prodhan was carried inside the Kashai Bustee and was ro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-08-1974
Reported in : AIR1976P& H1
Bal Raj Tuli, J.1. Tkis judgment will dispose of 211 civil writ petitions (Nos. 2513, 3261, 3270 to 3274, 3712 to 3720, 3722 to 3729, 3753 to 3757, 3761, 3790, 3913 to 3954, 4205, 4206, 4291 to 4293, 4303, 4323, 4366, 4373 to 4376, 4311, 4315 to 4387, 4395, 4396. 4402, 4403, 4405, 4409 to 4412, 4421, 4436, 4438, 4440, 4441, 4467, 4441, 4419, 4544, 4548, 4549, 4570, 4572, 4580, 4514, 4607, 4610, 4617, 4625, 4688, 4692, 4699, 4709, 4717 to 4727, 4730, 4741, 4743, 4775, 4780 to 4782, 4792, 4800, 4818, 4844, 4865, 4866, 4869, 4870, 4874 to 4885, 4192 to 4906, 4910, 4911, 4919, 4923, 4924, 4935, 4947, 4962 to 4964, 4967 to 4972, 4985, 4990, 5002 to 5004, 5007, 5008, 5028, 5029, 5035, 5052, 5053, 5059, 5081, 5084, 5100, 5105, 5109, 5113, 5117 and 5122 of 1974) as common questions of law are involved. 127 writ petitions relate to the market committees in the State of Haryana and 84 to the market committees in the State of Punjab.2. The Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act (Punjab Act 23 of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-06-1974
Reported in : AIR1975P& H205
ORDERPritam Singh Pattar, J.1. This is a revision petition filed by Hari Bachan Sinch defendant against the order dated October- 22. 1973. of the Senior Sub-Judge. Ropar. whereby he permitted the plaintiff to amend the plaint on payment of Rs. 500/-as costs.2. Briefly stated the facts of this case are that Harcharan Singh son of Sardar Harnarn Singh resident of Kharar. District Ambala (now District Ropar) died in the year 1951 leaving Shrimati Suraj Kaur, plaintiff No. 1. a widow and Har-bhajan Singh, Plaintiff No. 2. a son by her and another son Hari Bachan Singh, defendant by another wife Jaswant Kaur. After his death, mutations in respect of the land owned by Harcharan Singh in various villages were entered in favour of the two sons in equal shares. Suraj Kaur filed four appeals against those orders before the Collector, Ambala relying on a will executed by her husband in her favour and these appeals were dismissed. She went up in revision to the Commissioner, Ambala Division and he...
Tag this Judgment!