Court : US Supreme Court
Communist Party v. SACB - 367 U.S. 1 (1961) U.S. Supreme Court Communist Party v. SACB, 367 U.S. 1 (1961) Communist Party of the United States v. Subversive Activities Control Board No 12 Argued October 11-12, 1960 Decided June 5, 1961 367 U.S. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Syllabus After very extensive hearings under the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, the Board, in 1953, found that the Communist Party of the United States was a "Communist action organization," within the meaning of the Act, and ordered it to register as such under 7. A remand of the case by this Court, 351 U. S. 115 , and a second remand by the Court of Appeals led to further proceedings before the Board, involving rulings on additional procedural points and two reconsiderations of the entire record, following which the Board adhered to its conclusion. After denial of motions made by the Party under 14(a) and after review on the mer...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1963Mad316
Anantanarayanan, J. 1. The main appeal (A. S. No. 93 of 1957) is by defendants 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in the Court below in a suit by a minor represented by his next friend adoptive mother, instituted in forma pauperis for possession, and, alternatively, for partition of the suit properties. This appeal involves a question of considerable interest and significance, with reference to the Hindu Law of adoption as it stood prior to the recent enactments which have attempted a partial codification of the Hindu Law. That question, broadly stated, is whether, upon the theory of spiritual benefit, which is now the guiding principle in determining the validity of an adoption, the widow of a predeceased son (the daughter-in-law) could validly adopt to her husband, after the death of the father-in-law, who had himself left a widow alive on the date of the adoption. There is a related question whether, assuming such an adoption to be valid, the adopted heir (the minor plaintiff in this case) could upon...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1963Cal598,[1963]47ITR247(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. Has Parliament succeeded in bringing 'Surplus' of a mutual insurance besiness not dealing with life, within the impact of Income-tax, is the main question in this Income-tax Reference.2. This reference is made by the Tribunal under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act at the instance of the assessee, the Calcutta Hospital and Nursing Home Benefits Association Ltd., for the determination by this Court of the following questions of law:1. Whether the profit arising to the assessee company from miscellaneous insurance transactions of mutual character was assessable under the Indian Income-tax Act. 2. If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the balance of the profits as disclosed in the assessee company's profit and loss account after deducting the various reserves should be taxable profits within the meaning of Section 2(6C) read with Rule 6 of the Schedule of the Indian Income-tax Act.3. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1962Guj128; (1962)0GLR269
Desai, C.J. 1. This Special Full Bench has been constituted in order to consider the question relating to the binding nature of the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to 1st May, 1960, on this High Court. This very matter was considered by a Full Bench of three Judges of this Court including the then Chief Justice in the case of Anand Municipality v. Union of India, reported in : AIR1960Guj40 . Later on, a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Mr. Justice Raju and Mr. Justice Bakshi found it difficult to accept the view expressed by the Full Bench in the aforesaid case and made a request for referring the question to another Full Bench for a re-consideration of the matter. It was held by the Full Bench of this Court in the aforesaid case of (1960) 1 Guj LR 82 : (AIR 1960 Gujarat 40) (FB) that the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to the 1st of May, 1960, i. e., the day on which the State of Gujarat came into being fell within the ambit of the words...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC723; [1962]Supp1SCR829
Wanchoo, J.1. These two writ petitions which were heard along with Purushothaman Nambudiri v. The State of Kerala : AIR1962SC694 raise the constitutionality of the Kerala Agrarian Relations Act, No. IV of 1961 hereinafter referred to as the Act. The petitioners come from that part of the State of Kerala which was formerly in the South Canara district of the State of Madras and came to the State of Kerala by the States Reorganisation Act of 1956. Their lands are situate in Hosdrug and Kasargod Taluks which have now been made part of the Cannanore District in the State of Kerala. They hold large areas of lands, the major part of which is held by them as ryotwari pattadars, according to the ryotwari settlement in the State of Madras under the Board's Standing Orders of that State. In these lands they have areca and pepper plantations besides rubber plantation. They also grow other crops on some of the lands. The Act is being attacked on the ground that it contravenes Arts. 14, 19 and 31 o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1964Bom7; (1963)65BOMLR191; ILR1963Bom715
Shah, J. 1. This is an appeal filed by the Collector of Bombay against the respondents who had filed a suit for the following declarations : (a) that there was a right on their part in limitation of the right of the Government to assess the suit plots of land or, (b) in the alternative, that there was in any event a right on their part in limitationof the right of the Government to assess the said plots of land in excess of the specific limit of assessment payable in respect of the said plots at the time when the Foras Act IV of 1851 first came into operation, viz., 1st July 1851, or to enhance the said assessment; (c) that the appellant had no right to fix or levy or recover the assessment of land revenue in respect of the said plots as intimated by him to them (the respondents) in his notices, all dated 29th June 1943; (d) that the decision and order of the appellant contained in the said notices were illegal, void and inoperative in law and not binding on them (the respondents) and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1962)64BOMLR311
Shah, J.1. This is a group of four appeals filed by the Collector of Bombay against the decision of the learned Revenue Judge in Suit Nos. 2 of 1943, 3 of 1943, 4 of 1943 and 5 of 1943 respectively to the effect that the plaintiffs were not liable to pay land revenue to the Government of Bombay as superior holders of the lands taken on lease by them from the Central Government.2. There was a group of 20 suits including the present suits, all filed at about the same time in the year 1943, in which the right of the Government of Bombay to levy assessment on the various plots of land in those suits was challenged. The majority of these plots were situated on Sleater Road near the Grant Road Station, which were originally held by the Central Government for the purposes of the B.B. & C.I. Railway and a few of them were situated at Mazagaon or on Hornby Road and were originally held by the Central Government for the purposes of the G.I.P. Railway. When these plots were no longer needed by th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC996; [1962]Supp2SCR226
Gajendragadkar, J.1. Writ Petition No. 197 of 1956 and Civil Appeal by Special Leave No. 279 of 1960 arise between the same parties and they raise a short question about the validity of section 13, sub-section 2 of the Hyderabad Atiyat Enquiries Act, 1952 (No. X of 1952) (hereinafter called the Act). The decision of this question lies within a narrow compass but the facts leading up to the Civil Appeal and the Writ Petition are somewhat complicated and they must be stated at the outset in order that the background of the dispute may be properly appreciated. 2. Sikander Jehan Begum and Khurshid Jehan Teleyawar Begum are the petitioners in the Writ Petition and the appellants in the Civil Appeal they are the legitimate sisters of Nawab Kamal Yar Jung who died on January 26, 1944. According to the petition, the said Nawab left behind him three legitimate wives and two legitimate sisters but no legitimate children. He had, however, a number of Khawases (concubines) and three illegitimate s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1962Guj88; (1962)0GLR204
Shelat, J. 1. This petition raises questions of considerable importance regarding the construction of certain provisions of the Gujarat University Act, 1949, the Impact of Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution on those provisions and the competence of the State Legislature to enact them. The facts giving rise to this petition are few and for the most part undisputed and may be briefly stated.2. The petitioner is the father of Shrikant, at present studying in St. Xavier's College, which is affiliated to the University of Gujarat under the Gujarat University Act, 1949. Shrikant took his Secondary education in P. G. T. High School, Bombay, and M. S. N. High School, Ahmedabad, and passed his S. S. C. examination in June 1960. The medium of instruction as well as examination throughout the period of his Secondary education was Marathi. He took the S. S. C. Examination in Marathi and his mother-tongue is also Marathi. His aim was and continues to be, as stated in the petition, to gualify hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Organized Village of Kake v. Egan - 369 U.S. 60 (1962) U.S. Supreme Court Organized Village of Kake v. Egan, 369 U.S. 60 (1962) Organized Village of Kake v. Egan No. 3 Argued December 14, 1961 Decided March 5, 1962 369 U.S. 60 APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA Syllabus Appellants are incorporated communities of Thlinget Indians in Alaska. No reservation has been established for them. They operate salmon traps under permits issued by the Army Corps of Engineers and the United States Forest Service and regulations issued by the Secretary of the Interior. They sued to enjoin threatened enforcement against them of a statute of the State of Alaska forbidding the use of salmon traps. Their suit was dismissed, and the State Supreme Court affirmed. Held: 1. The permits issued by the Corps of Engineers and the Forest Service do not exempt these salmon traps from state law. Pp. 369 U. S. 63 -64. 2. Congress has neither authorized the use contrary to state law of the salmon ...
Tag this Judgment!