Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC231; [1964]5SCR270
Ayyangar, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a single judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and are filed by two distinct parties who felt aggrieved by it, pursuant to the grant of certificates of fitness granted by the High Court under Art. 133(1) of the Constitution. 2. In Dwaraka Tirumalai - a village in the West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh, there is a temple dedicated to Sri Venkateswaraswami. The administration of the affairs of this temple was being conducted under a scheme settled on the 28th August, 1930 by the Subordinate Judge of Eluru in Original Suit No. 1 of 1925 on his file. That was a suit filed by certain worshippers of the temple under s. 92 of the Civil Procedure Code for the settling of a scheme for the proper management and administration of the institution. The hereditary trustees of the temple as well as the office holders thereof, and in particular the archakas and the Karnam were party-defendants to that litigation. There had, even then, been con...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1413; [1964]5SCR253; [1964]15STC153(SC)
Sarkar, J. 1. These appeals raise the question whether the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, sets a time-limit for making an order under s. 23(3) of the Act revising an order of assessment. The question depends on the interpretation of some of the provisions of the Act to which reference will be made in due course. 2. The facts are these. The respondents had been assessed to sales tax under the Act in respect of various quarters by a Sales Tax Officer. They appealed to the Assistant Collector of Sales Tax against the assessments contending that the Sales Tax Officer had wrongly rejected their claim to certain deductions from their taxable turnover. The appeals were allowed. Subsequently the Orissa High Court delivered a judgment in another case from which it appeared that the Assistant Collector was wrong in allowing the deductions. Thereupon the Collector of Sales Tax acting under s. 23(3) of the Act which provided that "the Collector may, upon application or of his own motion, revise any o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC101; 1964MhLJ124(SC); [1964]5SCR239
Mudholkar, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dismissing the defendant's appeal in which he had challenged the decision of the courts below ordering his ejectment from certain premises which are in his occupation as the tenant of the plaintiffs. 2. It is common ground that he defendant was a tenant of the plaintiffs and the rent of the premises in his occupation was Rs. 110 p.m. It is not disputed that the defendant was in arrears of rent from April 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959 to the extent of Rs. 1,020. On April 11, 1959 the plaintiffs served a notice on the defendant bringing to his notice the fact of his being in arrears of rent for 12 months and requiring him to remit to them Rs. 1,020 within one month from the date of service of notice and stating that on his failure to do so, a suit for ejectment would be filed against him. In addition to this the notice called upon the defendant to vacate the premises by April 30, 1959 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC457; (1964)66BOMLR254; 1964(0)KLT115(SC); [1964]5SCR230
Raghubar Dayal, J. 1. This appeal, by special leave, raises the question whether the amount of interest decreed for the period subsequent to the institution of a suit comes within the expression 'amount or value of the subject-matter in dispute' in art. 1 of Schedule I of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959, hereinafter called the Act, for purposes of court-fee payable on the memorandum of appeal. 2. The plaintiff-respondent No. 1 instituted Special Suit No. 5 of 1957 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Ahmednagar to recover Rs. 13,205 on account of the principal lent to defendant No. 7 and interest up to the date of the suit at the rate of 9% per annum. On July 18, 1960, his claim was decreed in a sum of Rs. 13,033-6-6 with future interest from the date of suit till realisation at 4% per annum on a sum of Rs. 10,120. 3. Defendant No. 7 appealed to the High Court against the decree. In the memorandum of appeal, defendant No. 7 valued the claim for purposes of jurisdiction ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1964]5SCR216
Das Gupta, J. 1. The assessee is the appellant in each of these four appeals arising out of four references under s. 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act to the High Court of Bombay. In two of these appeals (C.A. Nos. 599 & 600 of 1962) the assessee who has filed the appeals is the Mahalaxmi Mills Ltd., in the other two (C. A. Nos. 601 and 602 of 1962) the Master Silk Mills Ltd., is the appellant-assessee. Appeals Nos. 599 and 601 are in respect of the assessment year 1949-50; the other two are in respect of assessment year 1951-52. The controversy in all these cases is as regards the computation of written down value in calculating depreciation allowance. 2. Both the assessees had from before 1949-50 been carrying on business in Bhavnagar which was formerly an Indian State. In 1948 Bhavnagar along with other Indian States of Kathiawar formed themselves into a union by the name of United States of Kathiawar. Later the name Kathiawar was changed to Saurashtra. On March 16, 1949, the Raj P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1854; (1964)66BOMLR319; [1964(8)FLR421]; (1964)ILLJ752SC; [1964]5SCR190
Wanchoo, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree of the Bombay High Court on a certificate granted by that Court. The appellant was in the service of the Union of India. He was appointed on June 11, 1949 as an officiating Assistant Director Grade II in the office of the Textile Commissioner, Bombay and was working as such till September 15, 1954. The appointment was temporary and his services were liable to be terminated on one month's notice on either side. He was posted after the date of his appointment in the Textile Commissioner's office at Ahmedabad and continued to work there till February 1954. He was transferred to Bombay in February 1954 and was informed in August 1954 that his services would be terminated from September 15, 1954. No cause was assigned for the termination of his services and no opportunity was given to him of showing cause against the action taken against him. He therefore brought a suit in the City Civil Court at Bombay, and his contention was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1963]50ITR741(SC)
DAS GUPTA J. - The assessee is the appellant in each of these four appeals arising out of four reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act to the High Court of Bombay. In two of these (C. As. Nos. 599 and 602 of 1962) the assessee who has filed the appeals is the Mahalaxmi Mills Ltd.; in the other two (C. As. Nos. 601 and 502 of 1962) the Master Silk Mills Ltd. is the appellant-assessee. Appeals Nos. 599 and 601 are in respect of the assessment year 1949-50; the other two are in respect of the assessment year 1951-52. The controversy in all these cases is as regards the computation of written down value in calculating depreciation allowance.Both the assessee had from before 1949-50 been carrying on business in Bhavnagar which was formerly an Indian State. In 1948 Bhavnagar along with other Indian States of Kathiawar formed themselves into a union by the name of the United States of Kathiawar. Later the name Kathiawar was changed to Saurashtra. On March 16, 1949, the Raj ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1372; [1964]5SCR174
Ayyangar, J.1. The points raised in these three appeals which come before us by virtue of special leave under Art. 136 of the Constitution are somewhat out of the ordinary and raise for consideration whether the common order passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh rejecting applications to review an earlier order by that court, is correct on the facts which we shall state presently. 2. The appellant - M/s Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. are manufacturers of groundnut oil, part of which they covert for sale into hydrogenated oil while the rest is sold as ordinary oil. Under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, which has application to the State of Andhra Pradesh, while in regard to groundnuts the tax is levied at the point of purchase, groundnut oil is taxed at the point of sale. The result of this feature naturally is that when a person purchases groundnut and converts the same into oil and sells the oil extracted he has to pay tax at both the points. R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1341; (1964)0GLR55; [1964]5SCR157
Shah, J.1. Haji Gulamnabi Haji Safibhai - hereinafter called 'the plaintiff' - is the owner of certain premises in the town in Baroda, and Vora Abbasbhai - hereinafter called 'the defendant' - occupies the premises as plaintiff's tenant on a monthly rental of Rs. 70. By notice dated December 1, 1956 which was served on December 3, 1956, the plaintiff called upon the defendant to deliver possession of the premises alleging that the latter had failed to pay rent since October 1, 1955. The defendant by his letter dated December 7, 1956 contended that he had paid rent at the agreed rate till April 1, 1956, and that he was entitled to get credit for Rs. 200 being the costs incurred by him for 'electric-installation' in the premises made with the plaintiff's consent, and that the rent stipulated was excessive. 2. On January 5, 1957 the defendant moved the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Baroda under s. 11(1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, called for the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1268; (1964)66BOMLR315; 1964MhLJ426(SC); [1964]5SCR148
Subba Rao, J.1. These six appeals filed by special leave raise a common question, namely whether the suits filed against the Western Railway for the refund of amounts collected from the appellant-firm as wharfage or demurrage would lie in a Civil Court. 2.Civil Appeals Nos. 152 and 153 of 1959 arise out of the suits filed for the recovery of the amounts collected from the appellant-firm by way of demurrage and the other appeals are filed for the recovery of amounts collected from the said firm by way of wharfage charges. It would be enough if we gave the particulars of the claim in one of the suits, for it was stated at the Bar that the claims for refund were similar in all the other suits. Excepting the plaint in Civil Suit No. 109 of 1957, the other plaints are not placed before us. We are, therefore, proceeding on the assumption that the relevant allegations in all the plaints are similar, particularly as the assertion of learned counsel for the appellants to the said effect was not...
Tag this Judgment!