Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1766; [1964]53ITR134(SC); 1965MhLJ111(SC); [1964]7SCR810
Sikri, J.1. The respondent, Swadeshi Cotton and Flour Mills, hereinafter referred to as the assessee, is a limited company which owns and runs a textile mill at Indore. For the assessment year 1950- 51 (accounting year calendar year 1949), which was its first year of assessment under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), it claimed that under section 10(2)(x) of the Act it was entitled to an allowance in respect of the sum of Rs. 1,08,325 which it had paid as bonus for the year 1947 in the calendar year 1949, as a result of the award of the Industrial Tribunal, dated January 13, 1949. The claim of the assessee was not accepted by the income-tax authorities. The Appellate Tribunal held that it was a liability relating to an earlier year and not the year 1949. However, on an application by the assessee it stated a case and referred two questions. We are concerned only with the one which reads thus : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the cas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC141; (1965)67PLR201; [1964]7SCR790
Gajendragadkar, C.J. 1. The short question of law which arises in this appeal by special leave is whether by publishing and distributing a poster (Ext. p. 10) in furtherance of his election, the appellant, Kultar Singh has committed a corrupt practice under section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (No. 43 of 1951) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The Election Tribunal which tried the election petition filed by the respondent Mukhtiar Singh challenging the validity of the appellant's election, as well as the High Court of Punjab which heard the appellant's appeal against the decision of the Election Tribunal have answered this question against the appellant. Accordingly, the election of the appellant has been declared to be void. Mr. Setalvad for the appellant contends that the view taken by the Election Tribunal and the High Court is based on a misconstruction of the impugned pamphlet. 2. The appellant was elected to the Punjab Legislative Assembly from the Dharamkot...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC54; [1964]7SCR800
Hidayatullah, J. 1. This judgment shall also govern the disposal of C.A. 681 of 1963. These are appeals by special leave of this Court against a common order of the Board of Revenue, U.P. dated February 8, 1960 disposing of three appeals. Civil Appeal No. 682 of 1963 (since compromised) was also against the same decision. The appellant in each of these appeals is one Amba Prasad who was the Zamindar of village Rhonda, Pargana and Tehsil Khurja, District Bulandshahr, before the coming into operation of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The opposite parties (who will be referred to as the answering respondents in this judgment) are persons whose names were recorded in column 23 (miscellaneous) in the Khasra for the year 1356 Fasli, as persons in possession and who claim, by reason of the entry, to be the recorded occupants of the fields in dispute, and to have obtained adhivasi rights in the fields under s. 20 of the Abolition Act. Though the point in dispute appea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1653; [1964]53ITR114(SC); [1964]7SCR767
Subba Rao, J. 1. This appeal by certificate is preferred against the order of the High Court of Judicature at Madras holding that a sum of Rs. 12,447/- received by the respondent from the Government during the accounting year 1950-51 was not assessable to tax for the assessment year 1951-52. 2. Gajapathy Naidu, the respondent, was supplying provisions to the Government Stanley Hospital, Royapuram, Madras. During the financial year April 1, 1948 to March 31, 1949, he entered into a contract with the Government for the supply of bread to the said hospital at the rate of Rs. 0-4-6 per 1b. As the respondent was maintaining his accounts on mercantile basis, it is common case that the amount due from the Government under the terms of the said contract was credited in the accounts of the respondent for that year. For the assessment year 1949-50 the Income-tax Officer assessed the respondent to income-tax on the basis of the accounts so made. It appears that some time after March 31, 1949, rep...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1843; [1964]53ITR122(SC); [1964]7SCR776
Shah, J. 1. Respondents to this appeal are a firm constituted under a deed dated December 12, 1947. The firm originally consisted of three partners : K. N. Damodara Mudaliar, A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar and v. Thangaraja Mudaliar. K. N. Damodara Mudaliar acquired for the firm for Rs. 1,00,000/- the exploitation rights which were to ensure for four years in a cinematograph firm 'Apoorva Chinthamani' for the North Arcot, the South Arcot and the Chingleput districts and for Pondicherry. For the period, December 25, 1947 to August 2, 1948 - which was 'the previous year' corresponding to the assessment year 1949-50 - the firm filed a voluntary return declaring that Rs. 28,643/- were earned by the exploitation of the film. In the statement submitted by the firm the total receipts credited in the firm's books were Rs. 1,46,849/-, and against that amount were debited Rs. 13,206/- as expenses and Rs. 1,00,000/- as the amount disbursed for acquiring the exploitation rights. Thereby in the computati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC314; [1964]7SCR756
Hidayatullah, J.1. In this appeal by certificate from the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad the appellants are the four original defendants in a suit for pre-emption filed by the first respondent. Kaiseri Begam (respondent No. 2) sold a plot and two houses in mohalla Gher Abdul Rahman Khan, Qasba Milak, Tehsil Milak, District Rampur, to the appellants on December 4, 1953. The first respondent Labh Singh owned the adjacent house and he claimed pre-emption on the ground of vicinage after making the usual demands. The suit was filed by Labh Singh in the court of Munsif, Rampur who by his judgment date September 25. 1955 held that there was a general custom of pre-emption in the town of Milak. He also held that Labh Singh was entitled to pre-empt and had performed the Talabs. He however, dismissed the suit because the sale did not include a strip of land 3 feet 6 inches wide between Labh Singh's house and the property sold. He made no order about costs. There was an appeal by Labh Sing...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1897; 1965CriLJ94; [1964]7SCR734
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 71 of 1963. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated November 23, 1962 of the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench at Lucknow) in Criminal Revision No. 251 of 1962. S T. Desai, O. P. Rana, Atiqur Rahman and C. P. Lal, for the appellant. C. B. Agarwala, Ravinder Narain, O. C. Mathur and J. B. Dadachanji, for respondents nos. 1 and 2. April 15, 1964. The Judgment of SUBBA RAO and DA,'; GUPTA JJ. was delivered by SUBBA RAO J. RAGHUBAR DAYAL J. delivered a dissenting Opinion. SUBBA RAO, J.-This appeal by special leave raises the question of the privilege raised by the Government of India in respect of certain documents called for from its Home De- partment in a criminal proceeding pending the court of the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption (East), U.P., Lucknow. The respondents were prosecuted in the said Court, after obtaining the sanction of the Central Government under s. 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for an offen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1889; [1964]7SCR760
Das Gupta, J. 1. The subject-matter of this litigation is a piece of land in the heart of the business center of the city of Calcutta. This was part of a block of 52 cottahs of land taken on lease on January 21, 1950 from the Official Trustee, West Bengal, by a private limited company, Raghuvanshi Private Ltd. The lease was a building lease for a period of 75 years commencing from January 21, 1950. The lessee was required to complete the construction of a three or four storeyed building on the land within 10 years. In September 1960, Raghuvanshi Private Limited in its turn leased 10 1/2 cottahs out of the 52 cottahs to a public limited company, Land and Bricks Ltd. This lease by Raghuvanshi Private Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as 'Raghuvanshi') in favour of Land & Bricks Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as 'Land & Bricks') created a monthly tenancy commencing from the 1st October 1950. Land and Bricks in its turn sub-let the entire 10 1/2 cottahs to the present appellant, Rupchand Gupt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC166; 1964(0)KLT398(SC); [1964]7SCR745
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. These two appeals arise from two suits Nos. 5 of 1947 and 32 of 1951; and the main point which they raise for our decision is whether the two documents executed by the appellants and two of the respondents are unenforceable as being opposed to public policy under section 23 of the Indian Contract Act (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The trial Court has answered this question in the affirmative, while the High Court of Kerala has taken a contrary view. 2. Poulo Varghese and Poulo Thommi who are the sons of Ouseph Poulo were carrying on trade in hill produce at Alwaye and in the course of their business, they had borrowed from the branch of the Catholic Union Bank Ltd. at Alwaye large amounts. In that connection, they had pledged goods with the Bank as security for the loan and the same had been deposited in a godown the key of which remained with the Bank. It appears that on the 10th February, 1947, the Officers of the Head Office of the Bank inspected the godown a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1; 1965CriLJ100; [1964]7SCR724
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. This appeal, on certificate granted by the Calcutta High Court, is directed against an order of the High Court dated June 20, 1960 reversing the Order of the Chief Presidency Magistrate directing return of certain documents to the respondent, and has arisen in the following circumstances : On April 6, 1959, the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, ordered the issue of search warrants on the application of the Enforcement Officer, Enforcement Directorate, Ministry of Finance, under sub-s. (3) of s. 19 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 (Act VII of 1947). The search warrant was issued on May 6, 1959. It required the production of documents seized, before the Magistrate. In execution of the search warrant, a number of documents were seized from the possession of the respondent on May 14, 1959. The Enforcement Officer reported that day that a certain room could not be searched and therefore further action on the search warrant was to be taken. He also noted...
Tag this Judgment!