Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC765; [1955]2SCR483; [1955]6STC627(SC)
Bhagwati, J.1. These 3 appeals with certificate under article 132(1) of the Constitution involve the interpretation of the proviso to article 286(2) and raise a common question as to whether that proviso also saves the transactions of sale or purchase covered by the Explanation to article 286(1)(a) from the ban imposed therein. 2. The Appellants in Civil Appeal No. 132 of 1955 are Messrs. Ramnarain Sons Ltd., a firm registered as a 'dealer' under the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, and carrying on business at Amravati and at other places in Madhya Pradesh. After the Cotton Control Order, 1949, came into force on the 12th September 1949, the Appellants entered into agreements with several mills situated outside Madhya Pradesh by which they undertook to purchase kapas in the various markets in Madhya Pradesh as their agents on their account and on their behalf. The kapas after purchase was to be ginned and pressed into bales and sent to the mills. All the expenses involv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC799; 1956(0)KLT371(SC); (1956)IMLJ1; [1955]2SCR477
Venkatarama Ayyar, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the order of the Election Tribunal, Quilon declaring the election of the appellant to the Legislative Assembly of the State of Travancore-Cochin from the Shencottah Constituency void on the ground that he was disqualified to stand for election under section 7(d) read with section 9(2) of Act No. XLIII of 1951. 2. Under section 7(d), a person is disqualified for being chosen as a member of the Legislative Assembly of a State, if he is interested in any contract for the supply of goods or for the execution of any works for the Government of that State. Section 9(2) declares that if any such contract has been entered into by or on behalf of a Hindu undivided family, every member thereof shall be subject to the disqualification mentioned in section 7(d) but that if the contract has been entered into by a member of an undivided family carrying on a separate business in the course of such business, other members of the family...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC76; (1956)IMLJ4(SC)
Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J.1. This appeal comes before us on leave granted-by the High Court of Madras. The appellants 2 to 6 are the legal representatives of V.O. Vakkan who was the plaintiff in the Subordinate Judge's Court and the appellant before the High Court of Madras.2. V.O. Vakkan was a resident of Palluruthy in the Cochin State and was trading in coir yarn. He was assessed by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chowghat (Madras State) to a sales tax of Rs. 12,301/4/- on a net turnover of Rs. 12,30,124/- for the year ending 31-3-1946, under the Madras General Sales Tax Act. He objected to this assessment on the ground that he was a non-resident foreigner so far as the Madras State was concerned and that he did not carry on any business either personally or through any agent within that State.His objections were overruled by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, the Commercial Tax Officer of Malabar and the Board of Revenue. . Thereupon, he filed a suit O. S. No. 25 of 1948 in the Sub...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC51; 1956CriLJ147
Bose, J.1. The appellant Parbhu was indicted for the murder of his sister-in-law Mst. Parvati. Parbhu's sons, Babu and Bhika, his brother Ganpat and Ganpat's son Vishnu were also charged.2. The Sessions Judge convicted Parbhu and his two sons under Section 302, read with Section 34, Penal Code, and acquitted the other two. All three were sentenced to transportation.3. The High Court allowed the appeals of the sons and acquitted them. The conviction of the father under Section 302, read with Section 34, was maintained.4. That at once raises the conundrum that arises in this class of case. The appellant was not charged for having committed the murder himself, nor does the evidence indicate that he was charged for having shared the common intention of four named persons and for having participated in the crime. If these four persons are all acquitted, the element of sharing a common intention with them disappears; and unless it can be proved that he shared a common intention with the actu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC807; 1955CriLJ1653
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment and order of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dated the 31-3-1953 allowing the appeal of the State of Uttar Pradesh against the order of acquittal passed by the Additional Sessions Judge of Meerut dated the 25-5-1951, so far as the appellant was concerned. The appellant and another person named Hoshiara had both been placed on trial for an offence under Section 302, Penal Code read with Section 34, Penal Code. Both had been acquitted by the learned trial Judge.But the State of Uttar Pradesh preferred an appeal only as against the appellant, The appellant has been convicted under that section and sentenced to transportation for life.2. The charge against the appellant, as also against the co-accused was that on the night between the 3rd and 4th June 1950 in village Tavela Garhi, P. O. Binauli, sub-district Sardhana, district Meerut, he had murdered Smt. Shivdevi in the latter's 'gher' and thereby committed an off...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC775; [1955]2SCR469
Venkatarama Ayyar, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the order of the Election Tribunal, Vellore, declaring the election of the appellant to the Legislative Assembly void on the ground that there had been a violation of section 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act No. XLIII of 1951. Under that section, it is a major corrupt practice for a candidate or his agent to incur or authorise the incurring of expenditure in contravention of the Act or any rule made thereunder. Rule 117 provides that : 'No expense shall be incurred or authorised by a candidate or his election agent on account of or in respect of the conduct and management of an election in any one constituency in a State in excess of the maximum amount specified in respect of that Constituency in Schedule V'. 2. Under Schedule V, the maximum expenses specified for election to the Madras State Legislature from a single-member constituency, such as Ranipet, is Rs. 8,000. The return of the expenses lodged by ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC830; [1955]2SCR457
Venkatarama Ayyar, J.1. The appellant was a candidate for election to the Legislative Assembly of the State of PEPSU from the Dhuri Constituency, and having secured the largest number of votes was declared duly elected. The first respondent who is one of the electors in the Constituency filed the petition out of which the present appeal arises, for setting aside the election on the grounds, inter alia, (1) that the nomination of one Mali Singh had been wrongly rejected by the returning officer, and (2) that the appellant was guilty of the corrupt practice of bribery. The Tribunal held that both these grounds were made out, and accordingly set aside the election. It further recorded a finding in terms of section 99(1)(a) of the Representation of the People Act No. XLIII of 1951 that the appellant was proved to have committed the corrupt practice of bribery as mentioned in section 123(1) of the Act. The appellant thereupon filed in the High Court of Patiala and East Punjab States Union a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC756
Venkatarama Ayyar, J.1. The appellant was one of several candidates who stood for election to the Legislative Assembly of the State of Mysore from the Tarikera Constituency. At the polling which took place on 4-1-1952 he obtained 8093 votes as against 8059 got by the first respondent, the others getting much less, & was duly declared elected. The first respondent then filed a petition for getting aside the election on the ground that the appellant had committed corrupt and illegal practices, and also prayed that he might himself be declared duly elected.By its order dated 15-1-1953, the Election Tribunal, Shimoga held that three of the corrupt practices set out in the petition had been proved, viz., (1) that one Ahmed Jan had with the connivance of the appellant transported voters to the polling booth in a service bus free of fare, (2) that the appellant secured the services of a Government servant, Parameswarappa to canvass for him at the election, and (3) that the return of election ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC762; 1955CriLJ1542
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the Judgment of the High Court of Judicature for the State of Punjab at Simla convicting the appellant Mohinder Singh, aged 25 years, under Section 302, I. P. C. and sentencing him to death. The appellant along with his sister's son, Baj Singh, had been placed on trial for the murder of Kapur Singh. Both had been convicted of the offence and sentenced, the appellant as stated above, and Baj Singh to transportations for life. On appeal Baj Singh was acquitted by the High Court on giving him the benefit of the doubt.2. The facts of this case may shortly be stated as follows: At about 2-30 a.m. on 29-5-1954, the first information report was lodged by Sunder Singh, lambardar of village Chirewan, at police station Muktsar in the district of Ferozepore, to the effect that Phula Singh (P.W. 1) was a displaced person from the district of Lahore. He had been settled in the village Chirewan on an allotment of 16 standard acres of land. He had t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1955SC761
Das, Actg. C.J.1. This is an appeal by special leave granted by this Court on 24-1-1955, on a limited point hereinafter mentioned against the judgment of the Election Tribunal, Meerut, dated 10-10-1954, whereby the Tribunal set aside the election of the appellant as Chairman of the Town Area Committee, Phalaoda, District Meerut, and declared the respondent as the duly elected Chairman.2. Under the U. P. Town Areas Act, 1914 the Chairman of a Town Area Committee is elected directly by the electorates of the Town Area at an election held simultaneously with the general election of the members of the Committee. The election of the Chairman of the Town Area Committee, Phalaoda, District Meerut, was held on 28-10-1953. The appellant and the respondent were the only contesting candidates. On counting of votes the appellant was found to have secured 1,980 votes as against 1,280 votes polled, by the respondent. The appellant was accordingly declared to have been elected as the Chairman. On 11-...
Tag this Judgment!