Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2000]101CompCas459(SC); 2000(3)CTC178; JT2000(6)SC604; 2000(4)SCALE616; (2000)5SCC471; [2000]Supp1SCR291; 2001(1)LC54(SC); (2000)3UPLBEC2140
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. The appellants who carry on the business of 'shroffs' are impugning the validity of Section 9 of the Reserve Bank of India Act as amended by the Amendment Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')on the ground that the said provision is violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.2. The trade of business of shroffs in India has been in existence for a long time. This trade is carried on not only in cities but also in small towns and villages in parts of India.3.The appellants are shroffs engaged in the business of providing credit to the members of the public. The traditional mode of organising the business of shroffs over the past several decades had been by way of partner ship firms. The nature of the services practised by the appellants generally involved maintaining a mutual current account where the customer may either place deposit on call or withdraw money on call with out security. The financing activity of the shroff firms was th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1979CENCUS331D; 1979(4)ELT397(Ker)
V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C.J. 1. The appellant, The Madras Rubber Factory Ltd., Madras, is a company registered under the Companies Act with its registered office in Madras. It is engaged in the manufacture of automobile tubes, tread rubber both with and without cushion, and other rubber products sold under the name and style of 'Mansfield'. Its factory is located at Vadavathoor inKottayam District in this State. It started its manufacture of rubber products from the financial year 1969-70. Its products are supplied to itsdepots at various places throughout the country. In so doing, it has incurred expenses of storage, transportation, insurance, etc. In the matter of costing rubber, the practice seems to have been to strike the average price called the 'billing price' after taking into account all these heads of expenses, and to transfer to the depots the stock at the said billing price. The depots in their turn sell to the dealers or consumers. 2. The question agitated in this petition ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1970Bom73; (1969)71BOMLR157; ILR1969Bom402
1. This is a second appeal by the original plaintiff. Full facts leading to this appeal are set out in the judgment dated 21st December 1966 of Mr. Justice M. V. Paranjpe who framed certain issues and referred the same for trial partly to the lower appellate Court and partly to the trial court, as will appear a little later. But for the purpose of the contentions taken before me I may perhaps set out a few of the facts which may be relevant for the purpose of those contentions.2. The plaintiff instituted the suit from which the present appeal arises against four defendants in the court of the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ahmednagar at Sangamner for possession of a house mentioned in para 1 of the plaint. It was alleged that the house originally belonged to one Bhika Hari. Bhika Hari married six wives but had no son. On 7th December 1934 he made a will bequeathing this house to his daughter's son Shivnath. The will provided that his last wife Sakhubai should take the income dur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [2004]121CompCas523(Bom); (2004)3CompLJ304(Bom); [2004]54SCL461(Bom)
Anoop V. Mohta, J.Introduction :1. Global competitiveness :'The integration of the manufacturing and other facilities of the cement business of the petitioner-company into the resulting company and the eventual acquisition of management control of the resulting company by Grasim, will contribute to enhanced global competitiveness for the resulting company, thereby increasing its ability to compete in domestic and international markets. Increased competitiveness would contribute to the enhancement of future business of the petitioner-company and thereby contributing to the wealth of the shareholders of the petitioner-company.'2. The scheme of arrangement in question is revolving around the above objective of the companies.3. This is a company petition under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act in the matter of a scheme of arrangement between Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (for short 'L & T' or 'demerged company' or 'petitioner-company' or 'transferor company') and Ultra Tech Cemco Ltd. (for s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1975AP113
Ramachandra Rao, J.1. This appeal was preferred by the 2nd defendant originally against the judgment and decree in O. S. No. 50 of 1968 on the file of the Court of the District Judge, Guntur decreeing the suit of the plaintiff, State Bank of India for the recovery of a sum of Rupees 74,644-04 together with interest thereon and costs. The second defendant having died, his legal representatives were brought on record as appellants 2 and 3.2. The relevant facts are as follows: For convenience sake, the parties are referred to according to their ranks in the trial court. The plaintiff, the State Bank of India, filed the suit for the recovery of a sum of Rupees 74,644-04 on the basis of two accounts opened by the defendants with the plaintiff. The 1st defendant was a partnership firm known as 'Padarti Ratnam and Company'. Defendants 2 to 7 were the partners of that firm. Padarthi Ratnam and Co., was carrying on business in tobacco at Guntur for a long time, Prior to 13-8-1964 the partners o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(5)ALD1; 2000(4)ALT631
ORDERS.R. Nayak, J 1. The defendants are the appellants in this Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause (15) of Letters Patent. The appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26-4-2000 passed in ASNo.167 of 1998 by a learned single Judge of this Court affirming the judgment and decree dated 30-12-1997 passed in OS No.123 of 1988 on the file of the Court of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry.2. The sole respondent herein is the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed the suit for possession of plaint schedule property after ejecting the defendants therefrom and for recovery of Rs.4,37,500/- towards damages for use and occupation from 15-7-1985 to15-6-1988 and also for recovery of damages of Rs.26,000/- for use and occupation from16-6-1988 to 11-7-1988 and for future damages from the date of suit till recovery of possession at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per day.3. The case of the plaintiff insofar as it is relevant in this appeal and in brief isthat he is the sole proprietor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1970MP261
A.P. Sen, J. 1. This is an appeal brought by the defendant No. 1, M/s. Mishrabandhu Karyalaya, Jabalpur and its partners, from the Judgment and decree of the 5th Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, dated 31st August 1964, decreeing against them, the plaintiff Sheoratanlal Koshal's claim (A) for recovery of Rupees 15,307.04 paise with interest @ 6% per annum thereon from the date of suit, i.e., from 1st January 1963 till realisation, due on account of the arrears of royalty payable to him on the sales effected upto the end of December 1959 of the book entitled 'Saral Middle School Ank Ganeet', written by his son-in-law Maniram Vishwakarma, the copyright of which had been assigned to him; (B) for rendition of account of the sales effected by them of the book in question and other allied publications thereof, as per the Hyderabad Syllabus or otherwise, during the years 1960, 61, 62 and until the date of accounting, so as to ascertain the amount of royalty which had accrued thereon and be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1986(7)ECC236; 1986(25)ELT528(Guj)
J.P. Desai, J.1. These two appeals, one filed by the original plaintiff and the other filed by the original defendant, arise out of the same judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vadodara in Special Civil Suit No. 321 of 1973 whereby he partly decreed the suit of the plaintiff, these appeals are, therefore, heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The facts leading to the filing of these two appeals may be briefly stated as follows : -The plaintiff is carrying on the business of manufacturing metallised yarn at Kalki Road, Atladara, District Vadodara. The excise authorities at Vadodara started levying and collecting duty on metallic (metallized) yarn under tariff item No. 18 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 from 19th October, 1968. They issued demand notice for the period from 1st December, 1965 to 18th October, 1968. The plaintiff, therefore, filed a special civil application in this court, being Speci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)ALT743
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Sri Vasantha Venu Gopala Swamy Vari Temple, Gottumukkala village, Kanchikacherla Mandal, Krishna District, represented by its Chairman had preferred C.M.A. No. 717 of 2008 as against an order made in I.A. No. 284 of 2008 in O.S. No. 101 of 2008 on the file of the Vacation Civil Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam (In the court of the Junior Civil Judge, Nandigama).2. Likewise, C.M.A. No. 718 of 2008 is preferred by the self same Temple (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Temple' for the purpose of convenience) as against an order made in I.A. No. 285 of 2008 in O.S. No. 102 of 2008 on the file of the Vacation Civil Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam (In the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Nandigama).3. Respondents/petitioners/plaintiffs in both these matters being Mukkapati Venkateswara Rao and Seelamneni Venkateswara Rao though different, since similar questions are involved in both these civil miscellaneous appeals, for the purpose of convenience, these civil misc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [2005]142TAXMAN681(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J. The present appeal preferred by the revenue under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) has been admitted by this court on the following four substantial questions of law'1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the interest disallowed on loan given by the assessee to its sister concern for non-business purposes?2. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing to allow investment allowance on telephone exchange installed in fertilizer unit and distillery unit which is engaged in manufacture of articles and things listed in Eleventh Schedule of Income Tax Act, 1961?3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the ex gratia bonus payments made by the assessee over and above the bonus payable in accordance with the provisions of Bonus Act, 1965 were an allowable deduction?4. Whether on ...
Tag this Judgment!