Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC990; [1961]3SCR639
Hidayatullah, J.1. Mahabir Prashad Rungta, appellant in these two appeals, was plaintiff in his own suit and defendant in a counter-suit filled by Durga Datt, the respondent. The two appeals have been filed on certificates granted by the Judicial Commissioner, Vindhya Pradesh against a common judgment and decree of the Judicial Commissioner's Court in four appeals filed by the rival parties, two in each civil suit. Certificate was also granted to the respondent; but he did not take steps in that behalf, and we are, therefore, concerned only with the appeals of Mahabir Prashad Rungta. 2. The two suits were filed in the following circumstances : Rungta owns a colliery at Budhar in Madhya Pradesh. On October 30, 1950, an agreement was executed between Rungta and the respondent, Durga Datt. Durga Datt agreed to transport coal from the colliery to the railway station at the rate of Rs. 2-8-0 per ton for a period of two years commencing from November 11, 1950, to November 10, 1952. That agre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC725; [1961]3SCR647
Shah, J.1. On January 30, 1943, Bhola Nath Sambhu Ram as agent of the respondent L. Musaddilal delivered a bale of cloth to the railway administration E.I. Rly. at Agra railway station for carriage by railway to the Chola Station in the E.I. Rly. The consignment was accepted by the railway administration and a railway receipt was issued in the name of the consignor Bhola Nath Sambhu Ram. Bhola Nath Sambhu Ram endorsed the railway receipt in favour of the respondent and sent it by post to the respondent. The bale of cloth did not reach Chola, and the railway administration was unable despite efforts to trace it. There was correspondence between the railway administration and the respondent about the consignment. Failing to obtain satisfaction for the loss suffered by him, the respondent served a composite notice under s. 77 of the Indian Railways Act and s. 80 of the Civil Procedure Code on December 7, 1943, and thereafter on May 18, 1944, filed suit No. 283 of 1944 in the court of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC993; (1961)63BOMLR619; [1961]31CompCas185(SC); [1961]3SCR652
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal which has come to this Court with a certificate issued by the Bombay High Court raises for our decision a short and interesting question about the scope and effect of the provisions contained in s. 89 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 - Section 89, in relation to the law of banking. This question arises in this way. The appellant, the Oriol Industries, Ltd. (hereafter called the company) was incorporated on May 15, 1945, and it appointed as its managing agents M/s. Poddar Chacko & Co. Soon after its incorporation the company passed a resolution on May 21, 1945, whereby it decided to open an account with the respondent, the Bombay Mercantile Bank, Ltd. (hereafter called the bank) and in accordance with the said resolution an account was opened with it on May 28, 1945. Twenty-eight cheques were drawn on this account aggregating the total amount of Rs. 28,882-13-0 during the period between May 28, 1945 and July, 31, 1945. These cheques were drawn by K. Pod...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC29; [1961(2)FLR586]; (1961)IILLJ77SC; [1961]3SCR592
Raghubar Dayal, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave by Ardeshir H. Bhiwandiwala against the order of the High Court of Bombay allowing an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the appellant of an offence under s. 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 (Act LXIII of 1948), hereinafter called the Act, for his working the Wadia Mahal Salt Works situate at Wadala, Bombay, without obtaining a licence under s. 6 of the said Act read with r. 4 of the rules framed under the Act. 2. The main question for determination in this appeal is whether these Salt Works come within the definition of the word 'factory' under clause (m) of s. 2 of the Act. The answer to this question depends on the meaning of the word 'premises' in the definition of the word 'factory' and on the determination whether what is done at this Salt Works in connection with the conversion of sea water into crystals of salt comes within the definition of the expression 'manufacturing process' in clause (k) of s. 2 of the Act. 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC133; [1961]3SCR618
Kanpur, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature of Bombay at Nagpur dismissing a petition under Arts. 226 & 227 of the Constitution challenging the legality of the imposition of the octroi tax under s. 66(1)(e) of the C.P. & Berar Municipal Act (Act II of 1922) hereinafter termed the Act. 2. The appellants who were the petitioners in the High Curt are some of the rate-payers of the town of Akola in the erstwhile State of Bombay and respondent No. 1 is the Municipal Committee, Akola. On November 11, 1957, respondent No. 1 passed a resolution to impose an octroi tax on animals and goods brought within the limits of the Akola Municipality. This resolution and the draft Rules of Assessment and Collection were later on forwarded by the Akola Municipality to the State Government for publication. A notification dated January 3, 1958, was published in the Bombay Government Gazette on January 16, 1958. This Gazette Notification contained the draft ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC684; [1961]3SCR609
Kapur, J.1. These four appeals are brought against the judgments and decrees of the erstwhile High Court of Travancore-Cochin. The appellants were the plaintiffs in the respective suits out of which these appeals have arisen and the respondent was the defendant in all the suits. As all the suits involve a common question of law, it will be convenient to dispose of them by one judgment. 2. The facts of the cases are these. On September 9, 1943, the Nagercoil Municipal Council the respondent, passed a resolution under s. 78 of the Travancore District Municipalities Act (Act XXIII of the Malayalam year 1116), hereinafter called the Act. By this resolution, it was resolved to levy a profession tax at the rates specified in the schedule. This was notified in the Government Gazette of September 26, 1943, under the name of the Commissioner of the respondent Council. In this notification, it was stated :- 'Any inhabitant of the local municipal town objecting to the proposal may submit his obje...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1961]3SCR624
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the respondent M. Raghava Mudaliar who claims to be the reversioner of Madhava Ramanuja Mudaliar. In his suit the respondent alleges that after the death of Madhava Ramanuja Mudaliar which took place on March 22, 1893, his property came into the possession of his widow Manickammal. Subsequently the said Manickammal and Rengammal, the widowed mother of the deceased Madhava Ramanuja Mudaliar alienated the properties without any legal necessity. According to the respondent the said alienation was not binding on him and so he was entitled to recover possession of the said property free of any encumbrance or charge. Manickammal died on October 18, 1941, whereas Rengammal died in June, 1921. On the death of the widow Manickammal reversion fell open and that has given a cause of action to the respondent for his present suit. 2. Madhava Ramanuja Mudaliar died issueless and was survived by his widow, his widowed mother, his sister A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1962]44ITR529(SC)
Shah, J.1. This is an appeal with special leave under article 136 of the Constitution against the order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, refusing to call for a statement of case from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act. The appellants are a registered firm carrying on the business of money- lending and speculation in silver and shares. The partners of the appellants firm were also partners of Messrs. Morarka & Co., who were the managing agents of the Sholapur Spinning and Weaving Company Ltd. - hereinafter called the Sholapur Mills. The firm commenced business in August, 1942. In Samvat year 2000 (November, 1943, to October, 1944) the appellants purchased seventeen ordinary shares of the Sholapur Mills and thereafter they purchased 82 more ordinary shares between November, 1944, and October, 1948. 2. By November, 1948, the appellants held 99 ordinary shares. The appellants also purchased at diverse times 6,780 preference shares of the S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC77; [1961]3SCR579
Kapur, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta. The appellant was the defendant in the suit out of which this appeal has arisen and respondent No. 1 was the plaintiff, and the second respondent was a proforma defendant. The facts of this case are these : 2. On February 4, 1941, the respondent sold the property in dispute to the appellant for a sum of Rs. 10,000. On February 10, 1941, there was an agreement for reconveyance within a period up to February 10, 1943, for a sum of Rs. 10,001. The relevant clause of this agreement was the third clause which was as follows :- 'Clause 3. - The purchase shall be completed by the purchasers within two years, i.e., to say on or before the 10th day of February, 1943, time being the essence of the contract. If the purchasers shall on or before the 10th day of February, 1943, pay to the vendor a sum of Rs. 10,001 the vendor shall at the cost of the purchasers execute such conveyance as may b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1961SC998; [1961]3SCR583
Ayyangar, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave by the State of Madhya Pradesh against the dismissal of an appeal preferred by it to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Gwalior Bench) which declined to reverse the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge holding the respondent not guilty of an offence under s. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The ground of acquittal by the Sessions Judge, which was concurred in by the High Court was that the respondent was of unsound mind at the time of the commission of the crime and so was entitled to an acquittal under s. 84 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. There is very little dispute about the facts or even about the construction of s. 84 of the Code because both the learned Sessions Judge as well as the learned Judges of the High Court on appeal have held that the crucial point of time at which the unsoundness of mind, as defined in that section, has to be established is when the act was committed. It is the application of this principle to the f...
Tag this Judgment!