Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC210; (1953)IMLJ702(SC); [1953]4SCR1144
Patanjali Sastri, C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order of a Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Madras issuing a writ of prohibition restraining the Election Commission, a statutory authority constituted by the President and having its offices permanently located at New Delhi, from enquiring into the alleged disqualification of the respondent for membership of the Madras Legislative Assembly. 2. The respondent was convicted by the Sessions Judge of East Godavari and sentenced to a term of seven years' rigorous imprisonment in 1942, and he was released on the occasion of the celebration of the Independence Day on 15th August, 1947. In June, 1952, there was to be a by-election to a reserved seat in the Kakinada constituency of the Madras Legislative Assembly, and the respondent, desiring to offer himself as a candidate but finding himself disqualified under under section 7(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, as five years had not elapsed from his release, appl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC201; (1953)IMLJ697(SC); [1953]4SCR939
Mahajan, J.1. One Thangathammal who was a dasi (dancing girl) lived in the Tanjore district in Madras State and died possessed of some properties. She left her surviving three daughters, Saraswathi, Jagadambal and Meenambal. Jagadambal filed the suit out of which this appeal arises against her sisters for partition of the movable and immovable properties set out in the plaint and for allotment of a third share to her therein. She alleged that her mother was married to one Thyagaraja Pillai, that the properties in suit were the stridhanam properties of her mother who died intestate on 26th July, 1943, and that according to the law or custom of the community to which the parties belonged she and her sisters were entitled to share equally the properties of her mother. 2. Saraswathi Ammal, the 1st defendant contested the suit. She pleaded that her mother was not a married woman but a dasi who followed her hereditary occupation and was attached to Shri Saranatha Perumal temple at Tiruchuraj...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC228; (1953)55BOMLR517; (1953)IMLJ715(SC); [1953]4SCR1009
Mahajan, J. 1. This is an appeal by defendant No. 1 from the decree of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Second Appeal No. 557 of 1945, whereby the High Court confirmed the decree of the lower courts granting possession of land to the respondents on the forfeiture of a lease. The appeal is confined to survey No. 86/2 at Mundhava in Poona district. 2. The principal question arising for decision in the appeal is whether notice as contemplated by section 111(g) of the Transfer of Property Act is necessary for the determination of a lease for non-payment of rent even where such lease was executed before the coming into force of the Transfer of Property Act. The only other question that falls for determination is whether the High Court should have interfered with the discretion of the lower courts in refusing relief against forfeiture in the circumstances of this case. 3. The present respondents are the daughter and grandsons of the original plaintiff Vinayakbhat. His adoptive mothe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC198; (1953)IMLJ710(SC); [1953]4SCR1159
Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal, which has come before us on special leave, is directed against a judgment of an Appellate Bench of the Calcutta High Court, dated the 16th May, 1951, by which the learned Judges dismissed an appeal taken against an order, made by a single Judge on the Original Side of that Court, under clause 13 of the Letters Patent, on the preliminary ground that the appeal was not competent in law. 2. There is no dispute about the material facts of the case which lie within a short compass. On 7th August, 1947, a suit was filed by the respondent Kumar Rupendra Deb Raikot in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Jalpaiguri in West Bengal, - being Title Suit No. 40 of 1947, - for recovery of possession of a large estate known as Baikunthapur Raj situated in that district, on the allegation that he, being the eldest son of late Prosanna Deb Raikot, the last holder of the estate, became entitled to the properties on the death of his father under a custom of the family which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC195; (1953)IMLJ693(SC); [1953]4SCR1001
Das, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of possession of certain immovable propertied measuring about 93 acres and 33 cents which are more fully and particularly set out and described in Schedule A to the plaint. That suit was instituted by Konduru Venkatapayya, respondent No. 1, in his capacity as the Executive Officer appointed by the Government on the 15th July, 1942, in respect of Sri Somasekharaswami Temple at Kotipalle, hamlet of Donepudi, a temple notified on the 26th October, 1939, under the provisions of Chapter VIA of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act (Act II of 1927). The suit was instituted in forma pauperis. The claim for ejectment of the defendants was founded on the allegation that the properties belonged to the temple, having been given to it by an Inam grant made in 1770 A.D. by Janganna Rao, the then Zamindar of Rachur, that the defendants 1 to 16 and their predecessors were Archakas rendering Nitya Naivedya Deeparadhana services and as such w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC280; 1953(1)BLJR690
S.R. Das, J.1. One Jagdishwar Prasad Singh who was the son of Sripat Narain Singh by his first wife died on the 18th August 1934 leaving a minor daughter Srimati Kamta Devi. His wife had predeceased him but Jagdishwar Prasad Singh did not marry a second wife. It is alleged that Jagdishwar Prasad Singh had on the 18th December 1930 made his last will and testament. This will purports to have been attested by two witnesses, namely, one Sahdeo Singh, an Advocate practising at Ghazipur, and one Rameshwar Lal, since deceased, who was an Honorary Magistrate of Ghazipur. By this will the testator appointed one of his step-brothers, namely Ishwardeo Narain Singh, as the executor. By the will he directed that the entire fixed rate tenancy in village Billahri should be sold and the sale proceeds utilised towards the expenses relating to the marriage of his daughter and that until the property was sold the income thereof should be accumulated and should be utilised towards the expenses relating t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC221; 1983(13)ELT1277(SC); [1953]4SCR987
Das, J.1. On the 28th November, 1947, the appellant Hooseni Kasam Dada (India) Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) submitted to the Sales Tax Officer, Akola, a Sales Tax return in Form IV for the first quarter. Notice in Form XI calling upon the assessee to produce evidence in support of the said return having been issued by the Sales Tax Officer, the assessee produced his account books. Not being satisfied by the inspection of the account books as to the correctness of the return and being of opinion that the taxable turnover exceeded rupees two lacs the Sales Tax Officer submitted the case to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Amravati, for assessment. On the 25th January, 1949, the Assistant Commissioner issued a fresh notice in Form XI under section 11 and fixed the case for disposal on the 5th February, 1949. After various adjournments and proceedings to which it is not necessary to refer, the hearing commenced on the 9th June, 1949, when an agent of the assessee...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC215; 1953(1)BLJR318; [1953]4SCR1129
Patanjali Sastri, C.J.1. I concur in the judgment which my learned brother Mukherjea is about to deliver, but I wish to add a few words in view of the important constitutional issue involved. 2. The facts are simple. The appellants obtained a settlement of about 200 bikhas of land in a village known as Sathi Farm in Bettiah Estate, in Bihar, then and ever since in the management of the Court of Wards on behalf of the disqualified proprietress who is the second respondent in this appeal. The lands were settled at the prevailing rate of rent but the but the salami or premium payable was fixed at half the usual rate as a concession to the appellants who are said to be distant relations of the proprietress. The appellants paid the salami and entered into possession of the lands on the 2nd November, 1946, and have since been paying the rents regularly. On the 13th June, 1950, the Bihar Legislature passed an Act called the Sathi Lands (Restoration) Act, 1950. The genesis of this legislation ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC174; 1953CriLJ892; (1953)IMLJ686(SC); [1953]4SCR973
Mahajan, J.1. This is an appeal under article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, by Magga and Bhagga, who have been convicted under section 302, Indian Penal Code, for the triple murders of Ganesh, Gheesa and Hardas. 2. The case relates to an incident which took place on the night between the 3rd and 4th April, 1951. Gheesa and Ganesh, deceased, Ratna, Govind, and another Ganesh who is a witness in the case, and Hardas had gone to 'Imaratia' a well in village Gadwara on that night to keep watch over the crops there. Gheesa slept in one shed near the well, while Hardas slept in another shed some distance away, and Ratna slept in a third shed near the entrance gate. Ganesh, deceased, Ganesh (P.W.), and Govind slept on the threshing floor further away from the well. Some time after midnight Ratna woke up on hearing the cries of Gheesa. It is alleged that he then saw the two accused beating Gheesa, accused Magga having in his hand a farsi and accused Bhagga having a katari and an axe....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC185; 1953CriLJ911; [1953]4SCR581
Mahajan, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 16th April, 1951, of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 17 of 1950. The two appellants are members of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service. In March, 1950, appellant No. 1 (Rizwan-ul-Hasan) was posted as District Magistrate, Jalaun, and appellant No. 2, Mohammad Munawar, was posted as a Magistrate in the same district, having officiated as District Magistrate for some time in the early part of March, 1950. 2. On 2nd March, 1950, one Phundi Singh commenced proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the Court of the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Jalaun on the allegation that Kedarnath and Matadin were about to cut his standing crop by force and that there was an imminent danger of a breach of the peace. The magistrate issued notices to the parties complained against and ordered attachment of the standing crop. 3. On 4th March, 1950, one Shriram, brother of...
Tag this Judgment!