Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC187; (1953)55BOMLR503; [1953]23ITR230(SC); [1953]4SCR950
Bhagwati, J. 1. This is an appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay upon a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, whereby the High Court upheld the decision of the Appellate Tribunal that two amounts of Rs. 12,68,480 and Rs. 4,40,878 were the sale proceeds of goods sold by the appellant to merchants in British India, were received in British India and were liable to income-tax in British India. 2. The appellant is a company registered in the Baroda State, as it then was, prior to its merger with India. It manufactures textile goods in Petlad in the Baroda State and after the goods are manufactured they are sold by the company ex-mills. The company employs Messrs. Jagmohandas Ramanlal & Co. as guaranteed brokers. That firm guarantees the sale price of goods sold by the company ex-mills to the purchasers from Ahmedabad and receives commission as consideration for the guarantee and the work...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC420
Mahajan, J.1. These are appeals by Ramnath, Pratap and Purshotham under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India from the Judgment and Order of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur dated 22-8-1952 in Criminal Appeal No. 74 of 1951.2. Sunder, a goldsmith by profession and1 leader of one of the two rival factions in the town of Gadarwara (Madhya Pradesh) was shot while returning from a meeting at the ganj (grain market) and walking on the main cement road of the town at a spot in front of one Narayandas's house, where Phullu Mithya's lane meets that road, at about 11 or 11-30 P. M. on 6-4-1950. The night was dark and cloudy and the road had no street lights. He was taken in a tonga to the hospital and after enquiry from him, Mulchand (P. W. 20), his muneem lodged thefirst information report about this incident at the police station Gadarwara at about 11-45 P. M. Half an hour later, G. D. Mukherji (P. W. 5), first class magistrate, recorded Sunder's dying declaration, Ex. P-17, wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC148; [1953]4SCR533
Das, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of a Bench of the Calcutta High Court passed on the 9th April, 1951, in Civil Rule No. 1038 of 1950. This facts leading up to this appeal may be shortly stated as follows : The respondents were, according to the appellant, monthly tenants under the appellant in the respect of three rooms, one kitchen, one privy and a bathroom on the groundfloor of premises No. 6, Roy Began Street, Calcutta, at a monthly rent of Rs. 25 payable according to the Bengali calendar month. On the 29th Baisakh 1356 B.S. the appellant gave notice to the respondents to quit the premises on or before the 7th Jaistha 1356 B.S. The respondents having failed to comply with the notice the appellant on the 1st June, 1949, instituted proceedings under Chapter VII of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882, for the eviction of the respondents from the demised premises on the allegation that the tenancy had determined ipso facto for non-payment of rent ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC153; [1953]4SCR930
Das, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in an ejectment suit. His case was that defendant No. 1 Pratul Chandra Ghose was a Ticca tenant of premises Nos. 2 and 3, Watkin's Lane, Howrah, comprising an area of 1 Bigha 19 Cottahs of land on a rent of Rs. 78 per annum under the landlords Kumar Sarat Kumar Roy and Bibhuit Bhusan Chatterjee, pro forma defendants Nos. 2 and 3, that the plaintiff took a Mourashi Mokarari lease from these landlords on the 23rd September, 1937, and thereby became the immediate landlord of the said defendant and that the tenancy was determined by a notice to quit dated the 7th October, 1937. The trial Court, amongst other things, found as a fact that the tenancy of the defendant Pratul Chandra Ghose was permanent, heritable and transferable and was not liable to be determined by notice. The plaintiff preferred an appeal to the High Court but the High Court dismissed that appeal holding, amongst other things, that the finding of the trial Court as to the natur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC30
S.R. Das, J.1. The appellant Thakurprasad along with seven other persons was sent up for trial on a charge under Section 302/149, Penal Code, for having on 11-11-1950 between 9 and 10 a.m. at Mouza Paoni in Tehsil Mungeli of District Bilaspur in the State of Madhya Pradesh murdered one Nem Singh who was a co-sharer of the appellant in the Malguzari of Mauza Paoni. The Second Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, who tried the case acquitted two of the accused, namely, Nandli and Nirghani and found the remaining six accused including the appellant to be guilty of offence under Section 302/149, Penal Code. The appellant Thakurprasad was sentenced to death subject to confirmation by the High Court and the remaining five to transportation for life.There was an appeal to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh but the appeal was dismissed except to the extent that the death sentence of the appellant Thakurprasad was reduced to one of transportation for life. All the six accused persons applied to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC145; [1953]23ITR202(SC); (1953)IMLJ609(SC); [1953]4SCR1057
Patanjali Sastri, C.J. 1. This appeal arises out of a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, under section 21 of the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. The appellants are merchants carrying on business in yarn in Madura and are the sole selling agents for yarn manufactured by the Madura Mills Co., Ltd., distributing yarn to several constituents under forward contracts in respect of which they obtained advances of moneys from their constituents. During the chargeable accounting period (13th May, 1944, to 12th April, 1945) the appellants recived from their customers sums amounting to Rs. 7,69,569 and they claimed before the Excess Profits Tax Officer that the said sum should be treated as 'borrowed money' within the meaning of Rule 2-A of the Rules in the second Schedule to the Act and, on that footing, no excess profits tax was payable by them for the chargeable accounting period. The Excess Profits Tax Officer rejected the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC205; [1953]4SCR913
Bhagwati, J. 1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree passed by the late Chief Court of Oudh, affirming the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge of Sitapur, dismissing the plaintiffs' suit. 2. One, Thakur Shankar Bux Singh, proprietor of the Estate known as Rampur Kelan, situated in District Sitapur (Oudh) was heavily indebted and the estate had been in the possession of Deputy Commissioner of Sitapur as receiver from 1892 up to 11th July, 1901. Thereafter he was declared a disqualified proprietor under the provisions of 8(D)(1) of the U.P. Court of Wards Act (U.P. Act III of 1899) and the Court of Wards took possession of the estate on the 1st August, 1901. Under Section 34 of the Act he was not competent to dispose his property by will without the consent in writing of the Court of Wards, though prior to the 1st August, 1901, he had made four successive wills, the last being dated 19th June, 1901, under which he gave his estate absolutely to his wife. On the 30th No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC136; [1953]4SCR559
Mahajan, J. 1. Shortly stated, the facts giving rise to these three appeals are these : On the 4th July, 1933, Rai Bahadur Lala Hari Kishen Das obtained from the court of the civil judge, Sitapur, a final compromise decree in the sum of Rs. 3,88,300-2-6 with pendente lite and future interest and costs, on the foot of two simple mortgages executed in his favour in 1928 and 1931 by Thakur Raghuraj Singh. It was provided in the compromise that Raghuraj Singh would within a week sell to Hari Kishen Das at agreed prices some villages out of the mortgaged property selected by him and sufficient to satisfy the decree. He reserved to himself the right to get back the sold villages after five years and before the expiry of fifteen years on payment of the stipulated prices. The computation of the price of the sold lands was to be made in the manner laid down in clause (6). 2. Hari Kishen Das made a selection of eight villages, and deeds of sale and relinquishment in respect of them were duly pre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC156; 1953CriLJ862; [1953]4SCR589
ORDERBY THE COURT :- As the Constitutional issues raised in the petitions have also been raised in the appeals preferred by the petitioners they have been dealt with in the appeals by consent of parties, and the petitions are dismissed. The constitutional points in the appeals having been decided against the appellants by the majority the appeals will be heard on other points when the appeals are ready for hearing. 81. Petitions dismissed. 82. Agents for the petitioners/appellants : Rajinder Narain. 83. Agent for the respondent : G. H. Rajadhyaksha. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC131; 1953CriLJ668; [1953]4SCR546
Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J.1. One Kanwar Bikram Singh was a relation of the Rana of Kuthar. He was a jamindar with some properties. Bishanpura within the police station, Solan, was his summer resort. Manimajra in the Ambala District was his place of residence on the plains. He had married in 1938 Kalawati, one of the two appellants. She was herself a daughter of the late Raja of Nalagarh through a mistress. 2. Kanwar Bikram Singh was murdered during the early morning hours of 16th July, 1951, as he lay asleep on the roof of his haveli or mansion at Bishanpura. He had several incised injuries on his person. The case for the prosecution is that Ranjit Singh, the other appellant, who was a distant cousin of the deceased, committed the murder with the help and connivance of Kalawati. It is stated for the prosecution that the two appellants developed an illicit intimacy with each other, and that they got rid of Kanwar Bikram Singh, as he was cruel in his behavior to Kalawati. The last act of i...
Tag this Judgment!