Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC444; [1960]2SCR431
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: CiVil Appeals Nos. 422 & 423 of 1958. Appeals from the judgment and decree dated November 22, 1957, of the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Lucknow, in Civil Misc. Applications Nos. 54 and 56 of 1957. Niamatullah, S. N. Andley and J. B. Dadachanji for O. N. Srivastava, for the appellant. H. N. Sanyal, Additional Solicitor-General of India, Bishun Singh and C. P. Lal, for the respondent. 1959. December 14. The Judgment of S. K. Das and A. K. Sarkar, JJ. was delivered by' Sarkar, J. Subba Rao, J. delivered a separate judgment. SARKAR J.-Raja Udit Narain Singh was the proprietor of Ramnagar estate, a big taluqdari in district Barabanki in Uttar Pradesh, formerly known as the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh and for short U.P., an abbreviation still in use. Ramnagar estate was governed by the Oudh Estates Act (1 of 1869), and in the absence of any disposition by the holder for the time being, it appears to have devolved according to the rule of primo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC415; (1960)62BOMLR293; [1960]2SCR408
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Petition No. 171 of 1958. Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, for enforcement of fundamental rights. Purshottam Tricumdas, Porus A. Mehta, S. N. Andley, J. B. Dadachanji, Rameshwar Nath and P. L. Vohra, for the petitioners. C. K. Daphtary, Solicitor-General of India, N. S. Bindra, B. H. Dhebar and T. M. Sen, for the respondents. 1959. December 9. The judgment of Sinha, C.J., Gajendragadkar, Das Gupta and Shah, JJ., was delivered by Das Gupta, J. Subba Rao, J., delivered a separate judgment. DAS GUPTA J. The first petitioner is a Company registered under the Indian Companies Act having its registered office in Bombay and is engaged in the business of dyes, chemicals, plastics, and various other goods. The second petitioner is the Chairman and a Director of the first petitioner Company. In this petition for enforcement of fundamental rights under the Constitution they pray for the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, directio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC490
Imam, J.1. This appeal is by special leave by the State of Delhi against the judgment of the Punjab High Court acquitting the respondent of an offence punishable under Section 5 of the Indian Official Secrets Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) alleged to have committed by him.2. The respondent was convicted by the trial court and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 1,000 in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. His appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge of Delhi. The High Court in its revisional jurisdiction set aside the conviction and sentence.3. The ground upon which the High Court set aside the conviction was that the only evidence upon which the respondent could be convicted was that of R.C. Aggarwal, P. W. 10, who was to be looked upon as an accomplice. His evidence accordingly required corroboration in material particulars connecting or tending to connect the respondent with the crime. As there was no suck corroborati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC483
S.J. Imam, J.1. The appellant was tried by a Magistrate of 1st Class of Abu Road for an offence punishable under Sections 65(a) and 66(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 (Bombay Act XXV of 1949), hereinafter referred to as the Act, His servant Gangaram Makarji, accused No. 2, was also tried along with him under the aforesaid sections. A third accused in the case was the driver of the jeep car but the Magistrate did not frame any charge against him. He was accordingly discharged. The appellant was sentenced by the Magistrate to 6 months' S. I. and a fine of Rs. 500 under Section 65(a) of the Act and to 3 months' S. I. and a fine of Rs. 500 under Section 66(b) of the Act. The sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently. His servant Gangaram Makarji was sentenced to one month's S. I. and a fine of Rs. 100 under Section 65(a) of the Act and to 15 days' S. I. and a fine of Rs. 100 under Section 66(b) of the Act. The sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC438; (1960)62BOMLR244; [1960]2SCR393
S.K. Das, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave from a decision of the High Court of Bombay, dated January 31, 1955, by which it dismissed with costs a writ application (No. 1100 of 1954) made by the petitioners therein, who are now appellants before us. It raises for consideration and decision a land revenue problem of some complexity, which resulted from the enactment of the Bombay Taluqdari Tenure Abolition Act, 1949, (Bombay Act LXII of 1949), hereinafter referred to as the Abolition Act. The problem is if the appellants, holders of certain lands known as 'Lal-liti' lands, are liable to the State Government concerned for payment of land revenue under the provisions of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 (Bombay Act V of 1879), hereinafter referred to as the Revenue Code, after the enforcement of the provisions of the Abolition Act. 2. The problem has to be considered in the light of certain incidents of taluqdari tenures in the Ahmedabad district of Gujrat, with special reference...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC430; [1960]2SCR375
Das Gupta, J. 1. The three persons who have filed this petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of their fundamental rights conferred by Art. 14, Art. 19(1)(f) and Art. 19(1)(g) thereof are dealers in imported copper and carry on their business at Jagadhri in the State of Punjab. On different dates prior to April 3, 1958, they entered into contracts of purchase of copper with importers at Bombay and Calcutta. Before, however, they could take delivery from the importers the Government of India issued on April 2, 1958, an order called the 'Non-ferrous Metal Control Order, 1958' hereafter referred to as 'the order' in exercise of its powers under s. 3 of the Essential Commodities Act (Act X of 1955) - referred to hereafter as 'the Act'. In this order 'non-ferrous metal' was defined to mean 'imported copper, lead, tin and zinc in any of the forms specified in the Schedule of the order.' The Order was from the very beginning made applicable to imported copper. The price wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC1312
ORDERUnder Sub-section (3) of Section 7 of the High Denomination Bank Notes (Demonetisation) Ordinance, 1946 (No. III of 1946), the Central Government hereby grants sanction to the institution of prosecution against (1) Shri M. G. Desai, (2) Shri D.B. Pathak and (3) Shri H. R. Karandikar who are alleged to have contravened the provisions of the said Ordinance in the circumstances set forth below constituting offences punishable under Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the said Ordinance and other provisions of law.On 21st January, 1946, (1) Shri M. G. Desai, (2) Shri D. B. Pathak and (3) Shri H. R. Karandikar submitted false declaration under Section 6 of the said Ordinance knowing them to be false, and committed forgery of documents by showing fictitious depositors for getting exchange of high Denomination Bank Notes of Rs. 1,000 each of the total value of Rs. 10,55,000 from the Reserve Bank of India through the Bhor Treasury and actually got exchange of the said amount on the 4th Februa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC424; 1978(2)ELT297(SC); [1960]2SCR362
Kapur, J. 1. The petitioner was a wholesale and retail dealer in tobacco at Banaras and also owned a private bonded warehouse for tobacco and held licences for the same. In this petition he challenges the legality of certain orders passed by the Collector of Excise, Allahabad, which on appeal were confirmed and revisions against those orders were dismissed by the Central Government. The petitioner's warehouse was checked by Inspector Das who on finding some irregularity sealed the warehouse on December 8, 1953 and subsequently took possession of all the registers and stock cards. On December 22, 1953, 11.5 bags of kandi i.e. 'stems of tobacco', which were found in the petitioner's warehouse, were removed from the warehouse by the Inspector and stored in some other place. Against those orders the petitioner made certain representations to the collector and some correspondence passed. On June 15, 1954, the Collector, Central Excise, issued a notice to the petitioner to show cause why a p...
Tag this Judgment!