Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC264; 1965CriLJ249; [1964]6SCR920
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. Shiv Prasad Chunilal Jain, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 150 of 1961was accused No. 3 and Pyarelal Ishwardas Kapoor, appellant in Criminal AppealNo. 185 of 1961 was accused No. 2, at the Sessions Trial before the AdditionalSessions Judge, Greater Bombay. Along with them was a third accused,Rameshwarnath Brijmohan Shukla who was accused No. 1 at the trial. 2. As the two appeals arise from a common judgment, we would dispose of themby one judgment. The appellants would be referred to as accused No. 3 andaccused No. 2 respectively. 3. The facts leading to the conviction of the appellants are that a largequantity of iron angles was consigned early in February 1959 from Gobind Garhto Raypuram under railway receipt No. 597481. They were despatched in an openwagon bearing E.R. No. 69667. The labels of the wagon were changed at Itarsirailway station and it was diverted to Wadi Bunder under a label showing thatthe iron angles had been despatched from Baran to Wadi Bunder...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1260; [1964(8)FLR334]; (1964)IILLJ105SC; [1964]6SCR913
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. The short question which arises in these appeals by special leave is whether section 1(3) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (No. 34 of 1948) (hereinafter called the Act) is invalid. By their writ petitions filed before the Patna High Court, the appellants who are the workmen of the three respondent concerns, the Eagle Rolling Mills Ltd., the Kumardhubi Engineering Works Ltd., and Kumardhubi Fire Clay and Silica Works Ltd., respectively, alleged that the impugned section has contravened Art. 14 of the Constitution, and suffers from the vice of excessive delegation, and as such is invalid. These employers were impleaded as respondent No. 1 respectively in the three writ petitions. The High Court has rejected the plea and the writ petitions filed by the appellants have accordingly been dismissed. It is against this decision of the High Court that the appellants have come to this Court and have impleaded the three employers respectively. The three appeals p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1633; [1964]6SCR903
Sikri, J. 1. This is an appeal directed against the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court, which granted a certificate under Art. 133(1)(c). 2. One Mukanchand, respondent No. 1 in this appeal (hereinafter referred to as the decree-holder) obtained a mortgage decree on February 12, 1954, for Rs. 1,14,581-14-6, with future interest at 6 per cent per annum, against one Rao Raja Inder Singh (hereinafter referred to as the judgment-debtor). The mortgage money was advanced under three mortgages, and the mortgaged properties consisted of 2 Jagirs and some non-jagir immovable property. The latter property was sold in execution and Rs. 33,750/- paid to the decree-holder in partial satisfaction of the decree. On December 14, 1956, the decree-holder filed an execution petition in the Court of the District Judge, Jodhpur, for Rs. 99,965-3-6, praying for attachment of the amount of compensation and rehabilitation grant which would be paid to the judgment debtor on account of resumption of his jagir....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC40; [1964]34CompCas458(SC); [1964]6SCR885
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. These writ petitions have been placed for hearing before us in a group, because they raise a common question of law in regard to the validity of the demand for sales tax which has been made against the respective petitioners by the Sales-Tax Officers for different areas. The facts in respect of each one of the writ petitions are not the same and the years for which the demand is made are also different; but the pattern of contention is uniform and the arguments urged in each one of them are exactly the same. Broadly stated, the case for the petitioners is that the appropriate authorities purporting to act under the different Sales Tax Acts are attempting to recover from the petitioners sales-tax in respect of transactions to which the petitioners were parties, though the said transactions are not taxable under Art. 286 of the Constitution. Art. 286(1)(a) provides that no law of a Sales shall impose, or authorise the imposition of, a tax on the sale or purchase of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1511; [1964]6SCR876
Gajendragadkar, C.J. 1. These two appeals which have been brought to this Court with a certificate issued by the Assam High Court, raise a short question about the construction and effect of section 5 of the Assam Non-Agricultural Urban Area Tenancy Act, 1955 (No. 12 of 1955) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The relevant and material facts which have led to the suits from which these two appeals respectively arise, are similar, and so, it would not be necessary to state them in detail in regard to both the matters. We would, therefore, mention the facts broadly in C.A. No. 549/1962, in dealing with the common point raised for our decision. The appellant in this case is Mst. Rafiquennessa who sued the predecessor of the respondents for ejectment. It appears that Lal Bahadur Chetri has executed a registered lease-deed in favour of the appellant on the 14th February, 1946. The lease covered an open plot of land and under the covenant the leasee was entitled to build a house for residential...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC922; [1964]6SCR867; [1964]15STC403(SC)
Wanchoo, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the order of the AndhraPradesh High Court. The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Courtquestioning the validity of s. 11(2) of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act,No. XIV of 1950, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The material facts onwhich the petition was based were these. The appellant acted as agent in thethen State of Hyderabad to both resident and non-resident principals in regardto sale of betel leaves. Under the Act betel leaves were taxable at thepurchase point from May 1, 1953, by virtue of a notification in that behalf. Weare here concerned with the assessment period from May 1, 1953 to March 31,1954, covered by the assessment year 1953-54. The appellant collected sales taxfrom the purchasers in connection with the sales made by it on the basis thatthe incident of the tax lay on the sellers and assured the purchasers thatafter paying the tax to the appellant, there would be no further liability onthem. Aft...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1329; [1964]52ITR583(SC); 1964MhLJ491(SC); [1964]6SCR857
Wanchoo, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. It raises the question of the validity of certain provisions of the Indore Industrial Tax Rules, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as the Tax Rules) and assessments made thereunder for the years 1940 to 1948. The appellant is a cotton mill and in 1927 a tax was imposed on cotton mills in Indore in Holkar State by the then Ruler in respect of profits, gains and income of such mills. This was done under the Tax Rules promulgated by the Ruler of Indore. The procedure under the Tax Rules provided for a board of assessing officers. The orders of the board were open to appeal to the Member-in-charge of Commerce and Industry Department. Thereafter a second appeal was provided to the Government. Rule 17 of the Tax Rules further provided that the power of making rules was vested in the Government and such power shall except on the first occasion of exercise thereof, be subject to the condition ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1190; [1964]6SCR826
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. These civil appeals and writ petitions have been placed before us forhearing in a group, because all of them raise a common question of law aboutthe validity of section 34(1A) of the Income-tax Act (No. XI of 1922)(hereinafter called 'the Act'). M/s. K. S. Rashid & Son, and its partner,Rashid Ahmed, are the appellants in Civil Appeals Nos. 37 to 40/1963, andpetitioners in W.Ps. Nos. 335 - 345/1960 335 - 345/1960 . The appeals arise out of the fourwrit petitions (Nos. 870 - 873 of 1956) filed by the firm and its partner inthe High Court of Allahabad challenging the validity of the notices served uponthem under s. 34(IA) of the Act in respect of their income for the years1941-42 to 1946-47. These writ petitions have been dismissed by the said HighCourt and it is with the certificate issued by it that the firm and its partnerhave come to this court in appeal. The Writ Petitions Nos. 335 - 345/1960 335 - 345/1960 havebeen filed by the same parties in this Court under...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1256; [1964]6SCR837
Wanchoo, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the order of the Deputy Custodian General, and the question involved is whether the appellant is liable to pay Rs. 85,000/- to the Custodian. The matter has a long history behind it which it is necessary to set out in order to understand the point now in dispute in the present appeal. The money in question was deposited with the appellant by his sister as far back as January 1946. The total amount deposited was Rs. 90,000/-, but the appellant's sister took back Rs. 5,000/-, with the result that the balance of Rs. 85,000/- remained deposited with the appellant. The appellant's sister thereafter migrated to Pakistan sometimes between June to August 1949. Sometime later, the Assistant Custodian General called upon the appellant to pay this sum lying in deposit under s. 48 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, No. XXXI of 1950, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The appellant contested the matter on the ground that the mo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1179; [1964]52ITR443(SC); 1964MhLJ697(SC); [1964]6SCR846
Shah, J. 1. Bhopal Sugar Industrial Ltd. - hereinafter called 'the Company' - was incorporated under the Companies Act of the former Indian State of Bhopal. In 1953 the State of Bhopal, which was then a Part 'C' State under the Constitution of India, enacted 'the Bhopal State Agricultural Income-tax Act, IX of 1953' providing for imposition and levy of tax on agricultural income. The Act was applied to the territory of the entire State of Bhopal and was brought into force on July 15, 1953. 2. By the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 (No. 67 of 1956), territory of the Part 'C' State of Bhopal was incorporated with effect from November 1, 1956, into the newly formed State of Madhya Pradesh. Section 119 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, enacted that by the constitution of the reorganized State, no change in the laws in force which immediately before November 1, 1956, extended or applied to any constituent regions, was effected, and territorial references in the laws to an existing Sta...
Tag this Judgment!