Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC145; [1962]2SCR794
Hidayatullah, J.1. This is an appeal by the State of Madhya Pradesh, which stands substituted for the State of Vindhya Pradesh under the States Reorganisation, Act, 1956, and is directed against an order of the Judicial Commissioner, Rewa, by which he modified, on review, his judgment and decree in a civil suit filed by the respondents against the State of Vindhya Pradesh. The appeal has been filed on a certificate granted by the Judicial Commissioner, Rewa. 2. The only question urged in this appeal is that the suit brought against the State of Vindhya Pradesh was defective, because the proper defendant was the Union of India. Since the question is one of law, it relieves us of the duty of narrating all the facts. Briefly stated, the suit was for damages valued at Rs. 1,00,000/- and for a permanent injunction against the State of Vindhya Pradesh. The suit was filed in the following circumstances : The respondents are bidi merchants, and for that purpose, had obtained on October 18, 195...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1272; [1961]43ITR1(SC); [1962]2SCR823
Das, J.1. These two appeals have been brought to this Court on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Punjab under s. 66A(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.2. The relevant facts are these. Messrs Chunilal Moonga Ram, a firm of Delhi, carried on a speculative business in bullion, mostly in gold and silver, in Chandni Chowk at Delhi. For the assessment year 1946-47 it was charged to income-tax on its income from the business in the relevant accounting period. Similarly, it was charged to excess profits tax for the chargeable accounting period ending on February 6, 1946. One of the appeals, Civil Appeal No. 39 of 1960, arises out of the assessment of income-tax and the other appeal, Civil Appeal No. 40 of 1960, arises out of the assessment of excess profits tax. During the relevant accounting periods the firm entered into certain transactions called 'hedge' transactions in the bullion market at Bhatinda (then a part of the Patiala State, that is, outside the taxable ter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1119; [1961]43ITR83(SC); [1962]2SCR833
Shah, J.1. Gurupada Ghosh respondent to this appeal filed suit No. 41 of 1953 in the 6th court of the Subordinate Judge at Alipore, District 24 Parganas, West Bengal, for a money decree against the appellant-Charu Chandra Kundu - for Rs. 32,132-12-3 claiming that he had advanced to appellant on May 11, 1949, 'by way of temporary accommodation loan' Rs. 30,000/- by a cheque drawn upon the Comilla Union Bank, Calcutta, and that the appellant had in two instalments repaid Rs. 5,500/- out of the amount advanced and the balance of Rs. 24,500/- with interest remained due and payable by the appellant. The appellant pleaded by his written statement that a loan of Rs. 30,000/- was advanced by the respondent to him and his wife Chapalabala and a promissory note was in consideration thereof executed by the borrowers in favour of the respondent and as collateral security for the loan, title deeds of certain immovable properties belonging to the said Chapalabala were deposited with the respondent a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC59; (1962)64BOMLR165; [1962]2SCR813
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. This appeal, on certificate under Art. 133 of the Constitution, raises the question, whether Dhruvraj, respondent, on his adoption, divests the defendants-appellants of the properties of his adoptive father and grand-father. 2. The facts giving rise to this question are as follows : Bandegouda, father of the respondent, died in 1882, pre-deceasing his father Narasappagouda, who died later in 1892. Bandegouda left his widow Tungabai, who adopted Dhruvraj as her son on July 31, 1945. 3. Narasappagouda, on his death, left two daughters, Krishnabai and Shyamabai alias Chamavva. The two sisters succeeded to their father's property in equal shares. We are not now concerned with the share of Shyamabai, the respondent's suit with respect to it having been dismissed. 4. Krishnabai died on October 21, 1933. Her son Vasappa, succeeded her and died on February 20, 1934, leaving two sons, the appellants, Krisnamurti and Subbaji. Dhruvraj, respondent, instituted the suit for the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1276; (1962)IILLJ498SC; [1962]2SCR802
Das Gupta, J.1. This appeal is from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature in Assam affirming the judgment and decree made by the Subordinate Judge of Upper Assam Districts, in a suit brought by the respondent Shyamsundar Tea Co., Ltd., against the present appellants. The appellant companies are joint owners of Steamer service between Dibrugrah and Calcutta. The main service is along the Brahmputra River. Desang is one of the tributaries of the Brahmputra and meets the main stream at Desangmukh Ghat. The plaintiff's case in the plaint was that the defendant companies as common carriers received goods at Dillibari Ghat which is situated on the Desang about 70 miles up-stream from Desangmukh Ghat for carriage 'therefrom by boats to Desangmukh Ghat and then by their steamers to different stations on payment of freight'. It is further the plaintiffs case that on September 10, 1946, the plaintiff company delivered 120 chests of tea to the defendants at Dillibari Ghat for ca...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1164; [1962]44ITR535(SC)
Shah, J.1. These are two appeals from certain orders in income-tax proceedings. Civil Appeal No. 457 of 1960 is against the order dated March 26, 1958, of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay refusing to call upon the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act. Civil Appeal No. 458 of 1960 is against the order dated August 13, 1956, of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, deciding an appeal under section 33(4) against the department. 2. The respondent was an employee of the Dalmia Cement and Paper Marketing Co. Ltd. By an agreement dated October 11, 1943, he was appointed to look after the Bombay Officer Organisation of the company at a remuneration of Rs. 4,000 per month. The company undertook in pay income-tax and super-tax due and payable on this amount of remuneration at the rate prescribed in the yearly financial Acts, and also to pay conveyance and entertainment allowance as may be agreed upon from time to time. The term of empl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC670; [1962]2SCR733
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. This appeal, by special leave, is against the order of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur, dismissing the petition of the appellant under Art. 226 of the Constitution. 2. On August 9, 1950, the appellant applied to the State Government, Madhya Pradesh, for the grant of a prospecting licence for manganese ore over an area of 83.18 acres, comprising khasra No. 1 of mouza Seoni Bhondki. The State Government granted the prospecting licence for this area on June 18, 1951, and intimated that the prospecting licence form which was pending approval by the Union Government, would be executed in due course. 3. On April 21, 1951, respondent No. 3 applied for the grant of mining lease over 32 acres out of the aforesaid area of 83.18 acres. On October 20, 1951, the State Government informed him that that area had been already granted to the appellant under prospecting licence, and it was not available to him. 4. On November 26, 1951, respondent No. 3 applied for review to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC130; (1962)64BOMLR74; [1962]2SCR775
Kapur, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the High Court of Bombay imposing the sentence of death in appeal by the State against the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhulia. The facts of the appeal are these : The appellant, in about 1950, married Sindhubai the daughter of Chandrabhagabai. Sindhubai who is the deceased had read up to the 7th Standard. The appellant and Sindhubai were residing in a one room tenement in a house belonging to one Tavar pleader in which there are in all 12 to 15 tenements. The tenement of the appellant was not very far from that of the appellant's cousin Shantabai who was residing with her husband Pandu Genda and the house of Chandrabhagabai was about a furlong away from that of the appellant. The relations between the appellant and the deceased were normal for sometime but about two years before the occurrence differences had arisen and there were frequent quarrels between them. A child of the marriage was born about 1-1/2 years b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC507; [1962]2SCR711
Subba Rao, J. 1. This appeal by certificate is preferred against the order of the Punjab High Court dated November 9, 1956, setting aside the order of the Consolidation Officer and directing him to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 2. The respondents are members of a joint Hindu family and are evacuees from Pakistan. On March 3, 1950, in lieu of the lands left by the family in Pakistan, the Custodian of Evacuee Property allotted to the said family 11 standard acres and 9 units of Grade 'A' land in Pati Kankra, Shahabad Estate in Tehsil Thanesar in Karnal District. The said units were valued as equal to 123 standard kanals and 18 standard marlas of 'A' Grade land. The family took possession of the said land, and, it is alleged, made improvements thereon. On July 28, 1954, the State Government issued a notification under s. 14 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the Act), declaring its intention to make a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1961)63PLR735; [1962]2SCR738
Mudholkar, J. 1. In this appeal under Art. 133(1)(c) of the Constitution the question which arises for consideration is whether after July 22, 1952 the Custodian of Evacuee Property in the State of Punjab or the Custodian General hearing an appeal from an order made by the Custodian after July 22, 1952 has the power to cancel an allotment of rural evacuee property on a quasi-permanent basis except upon the grounds set out in r. 14(6) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Rules, 1950 as amended by notification No. S.R.O. 1290 dated July 22, 1952. 2. The circumstances under which this question arises may now be briefly stated. The appellants and their father Nand Singh were displaced persons from West Pakistan and got allotment of some land in the village Raikot, District Ludhiana on a temporary basis. Later, each of the appellants 1 to 3 was allotted 8-1/3 standard acres of land on a quasi-permanent basis while Nand Singh, their father who was entitled to 41 standard acres and 7 uni...
Tag this Judgment!