Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1747; [1965]3SCR177
Ramaswami, J.1. Respondents nos. 1 to 11 were the Jagirdars of Waghach State in formerSankeda Mewar in Reva Kantha Agency which now forms part of the State ofGujarat. They claimed that they were the full owners of all the land includingforest areas in the said State and exercised full revenue power during theirregime. There were 39 villages in Waghach State in all of which there wereforests. Except for the lands which were cultivated, all the lands in the saidvillages were forest lands. Respondents nos. 1 to 11 further claimed that theyhad full proprietary rights over the forest lands and enjoyed the produce asfull owners thereof. By the agreement of merger dated June 1, 1948 the State ofWaghach was merged with the State of Bombay with effect from June 10, 1948. OnAugust 19, 1953, respondents 1 to 11 entered into an agreement with respondentno. 12 whereby respondent no. 12 became entitled to cut and remove all speciesof trees from the forest lands in the 39 villages for a period of ten...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1932; [1965]3SCR229
Shah, J. 1. These appeals raise the question whether the Academic Council of theMysore University was competent in exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 22,23 and 43 of the Mysore University Act 23 of 1956 to frame Clause 3(c) of theRegulations relating to the grant of the degree for Bachelor of Veterinary Science(B.V.Sc.). The Mysore University Act 23 of 1956 - hereinafter referred to as'the Act' - was enacted to provide for the reorganisation of the University ofMysore and other incidental matters. The powers of the University are describedin s. 4. Section 21 provides for the constitution of the Academic Council -which is one of the authorities of the University designated under s. 13 - ands. 22 sets out the powers of the Academic Council. It provides : 'The Academic Council shall, subject to theprovisions of this Act, have the control and general regulation of teaching,courses of studies to be pursued, and maintenance of the standards thereof andshall exercise such other powe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1839; [1965]3SCR364
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. The short question which these six appeals raise relates to theconstruction of section 30(c) of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949 (W.B. ActNo. II of 1949) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). This question arises in thisway. The respondent Sanat Kumar Ganguli is the owner of a plot of land beingpremises No. 12, Haldar Lane, in Central Calcutta. This plot had been let outin several lots to the predecessors-in-title of the six appellants. On July 24,1954, the respondent filed six suits Nos. 2240 to 2245 of 1954 against the sixappellants respectively on the original side of the Calcutta High Court,claiming decrees for ejectment against them and asking for arrears of groundrent and Municipal taxes. 2. The appellants contested the respondent's claim on the ground that thelands in suits had been taken by their predecessors-in-title from the owner asThika tenants in or about the year 1900, and they alleged that they were inoccupation of the said plots after having built s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1827; [1965]3SCR743
The Judgment of Subba Rao, Wanchoo, Hidayatullah and Sikri, JJ., was delivered by Hidayatullah, J., Shah, J., delivered a separate Opinion. Hidayatullah, J. 1. On January 11, 1960, the Advocate General applied to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad for action against the appellant Prabhakar Rao H. Mawle under s. 2 of the Vexatious Litigation (Prevention) Act 1949 (Madras Act VIII of 1949), on the allegation that Mawle had been 'habitually' and without any reasonable ground instituting 'vexatious proceedings' in the courts within the cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad and also in the High Court and appearing in the cases in person; that he was responsible for a considerable amount of litigation or, in other words, that he was a vexatious, and habitual litigant. In support of the petition for the invocation of the punitive provisions of the Act, the Advocate-General referred to the following cases :- (i) In C.R.P. No. 1765/58 Mawle described the judgment of the lower court as :...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1967)69BOMLR26; [1966]SuppSCR180
Shah, J.1. Respondent in this appeal is the owner of a building used as a cinematograph theatre. By a registered deed dated December 23, 1960, the appellant obtained a lease of the theatre at a monthly rental of Rs. 1,801/-. The appellant applied under s. 11 of the Saurashtra Rent Control Act 22 of 1951 hereinafter called 'the Act' - for an order fixing the standard rent of the theatre. He submitted that the rent stipulated to be paid under the lease was 'excessive, exorbitant and improper' and that the standard rent of the theatre, having regard to its situation and size and the amenities provided therein, could not exceed Rs. 350/- per mensem. The respondent by his written-statement submitted that the rent stipulated under the lease was reasonable. 2. The Court of First Instance fixed the standard rent of the whole theatre at Rs. 1,030/12/- being the one-twelfth of the gross return of 6% on the cost of construction of the theatre and the cost of furniture installed therein. But the l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC385; [1966]1SCR505
Shah, J. 1. By this petition the petitioner seeks to restrain the State of Gujarat from enforcing the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act 20 of 1964, on the plea that certain provisions of the Act infringe the fundamental freedoms guaranteed to the petitioner under Arts. 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution. 2. The Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets Act 22 of 1939 was enacted by the Provincial Legislature of Bombay and rules were framed thereunder. By a notification issued under the Act, the whole area within a radius of 12 miles of Ahmedabad City was declared in respect of certain agricultural produce, a market area for the purpose of that act and a market yard and a market proper were established for transactions in specified commodities. A market committee was established under s. 5 of the act for the Ahmedabad market area. In 1959 a locality known as the Kalupur market was declared a sub market yard for the purposes of the Bombay Act, and traders carrying on business in the Kalu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC557; 1965MhLJ850(SC); [1966]1SCR594
Shah, J. 1. The first respondent Tukaram was a protected lessee within the meaning of that expression in the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act 24 of 1951 - hereinafter called the Berar Act in respect of certain land at Mouza karwand in the Vidharbha Region [now in the State of Maharashtra]. The appellant - who is the owner of the land served a notice under s. 9 [1] of the Berar Act terminating the tenancy on the ground that he required the land for personal cultivation, and submitted an application to the Revenue office under s. 8 [1] [g] of the Berar act for an order determining the tenancy. The Revenue officer determined the tenancy by order dated July 2, 1957 and made it effective from April 1, 1958. In the meantime the Governor of the State of Bombay [the Vidharbha region having been incorporated within the State of Bombay by the Sates organization Act 1956] issued Ordinance 4 to 1958 a ban was imposed against eviction of tenants, and by s. 3 of Act 9 of 1958 a ban was im...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC602; (1966)IILLJ147SC; [1966]1SCR994
Wanchoo, J.1. These appeals by special leave raise common questions and will be dealt with together. We shall take the facts of one appeal (No. C.A. 237) in order to understand the questions in dispute and it will be unnecessary to refer to the facts in other cases for they are admittedly similar.2. Nanjappa, respondent in C.A. 237 of 1964, was a trained teacher and was headmaster of a Government Boys' Middle School. He completed the age of 55 years on February 3, 1958 and was ordered to be retired from service from that date on the- ground of superannuation. Thereupon he filed a writ petition in the High Court of Mysore, and the main contention raised on his behalf was that Rule 294 (a) of the Mysore Service Regulations (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which prescribed the age of retirement of Government servants, had been amended with respect to trained teachers from April 29, 1955, and in the case of such teachers the normal age of superannuation was fixed at 58 years i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC625; (1966)IILLJ132SC; 1966MhLJ366; [1966]2SCR134
Hidayatullah, J.1. This judgment will also dispose of Civil Appeal No. 260 of 1964. These appeals arise from a judgment dated October 27, 1961 of the High Court of Bombay in a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, filed by three First Grade clerks attached to the offices of the Collectors of Wardha, Bhandara and Chanda districts. They are the three respondents in this appeal. The petition in the High Court was originally filled by two of these respondents as Secretary and Member of the Ministerial Services Associations, Wardha and Bhandara respectively but they were treated as petitions on their personal behalf. The petitioners asked for a writ of mandamus against the Government of Bombay for the equation of their posts with Aval Karkuns in the State of Bombay (later the State of Maharashtra) under Sections 115 and 116 of the States Reorganization Act, 1956 (Act 37 of 1956) read with the Allocated Government Servants (Absorption, Seniority, Pay & Allowances) Rules 1957. As a fir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC563; [1966]2SCR190; [1966]17STC197(SC)
Shah, J.1. The question which falls to be determined in these appeals is 'whether the appellant Company is liable to pay sales-tax assessed under the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, 1950 on the price of coal supplied to allottees outside the taxing State pursuant to directions of the Coal Commissioner issued under the Colliery Control Order, 1945'. The Company which has its registered office at Hyderabad in the former Part 'B' State of Hyderabad, and now in the State of Andhra Pradesh, carried on the business of mining coal from its collieries and supplying it to consumers within and outside the State of Hyderabad. 2. These appeals relate to three financial years 1954-55, 1955-56 and 1956-57, during which coal was a controlled commodity, and its disposal and use could be made only under orders issued by the appropriate authority under the Colliery Control Order, 1945. The Company claimed that Rs. 1,75,67,286/1/2 in the year 1954-55, Rs. 1,17,39,636/11/8 in the year 1955-56, Rs. 1,55,1...
Tag this Judgment!