Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC745
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. This is Special Reference No. 1 of 1964 by which the President has formulated five questions for the opinion of this Court under Article 143(1) of the Constitution. The Article authorities the President to refer to this Court questions of law or fact which appear to him to have arisen or are likely to arise and which are of such a nature and of such public importance that it is expedient to obtain the opinion of the Supreme Court upon them. Article 143(1) provides that when such questions are referred to this Court by the President, the Court may, after such hearing as it thinks fit, report to the President its opinion thereon. In his Order of Reference made on March 26, 1964, the President has expressed his conclusions that the questions of law set out in the Order of Reference are of such a nature and of such public importance that it is expedient that the opinion of the Supreme Court of India should be obtained thereon. 2. It appears that on March 14, 1964, th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC948
N. Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. A very short point whether a finding in a previous suit between the same parties on the issue relating to the relationship of the respondent to the deceased owner *(See Second Appeal No. 249 of 1957 dated 3-5-1960 -- Punjab.) of the suit property is or is not res judicata in the suit out of which this appeal arises, is the only question for consideration in this appeal by special leave.2. The original owner of the suit-properties which consist of agricultural land measuring about 66 bighas and odd in the village Kotla and a kutcha house in the same village and another extent of 13 bighas and odd of land in neighbouring village, was one Jati who died childless on May 20, 195.1, his widow also having pre-deceased him. The respondents Sarwan Singh and three others claimed to be the collaterals of the deceased and his nearest heirs. Soon after the death of Jati the appellant Isher Singh, who put forward a claim based on an oral will by the deceased Jati, manage...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1039; (1966)IILLJ583SC; [1965]1SCR375
Gajendragadkar C.J. 1. The short question of law which arises in this appeal is whether the respondent, the State of Uttar Pradesh, is liable to compensate the appellant, M/s. Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain for the loss caused to it by the negligence of the police officers employed by the respondent. This question arises in this way. The appellant is a firm which deals in bullion and other goods at Amritsar. It was duly registered under the Indian Partnership Act. Ralia Ram was one of its partners. On the 20th September, 1947 Ralia Ram arrived at Meerut by the Frontier Mail about midnight. His object in going to Meerut was to sell gold, silver and other goods in the Meerut market. Whilst he was passing through the Chaupla Bazar with this object, he was taken into custody by three police constables. His belongings were then searched and he was taken to the Kotwali Police Station. He was detained in the police lock-up there and his belongings which consisted of gold, weighing 103 tolas 6 mash...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1004; [1965]35CompCas268(SC); [1965]55ITR716(SC); [1965]1SCR367
Sikri, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Madras High Court in a case referred to it under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', answering the question of law against the assessee. The question referred is : 'Whether four-fifths of the sum of Rs. 1,21,245 written off in the books of the assessee as depreciation for the calendar year 1953 is allowable as a deduction in the assessment completed under section 10(7) and the rules contained in the Schedule of the Income-tax Act ?' 2. The facts relevant for answering the question are as follows : The assessee is a public limited company carrying on the business of general insurance. It erected a modern substantial building with lifts and air-conditioning at a cost of Rs. 12,08,252 and got it ready for occupation from December 1, 1952. In its books for the calendar year 1953, the previous year for assessment year 1954-55, it wrote off Rs. 1,21,245 as depreciation as follows : ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1243; [1965]1SCR393
Mudholkar J.1. The short point for consideration in this appeal from the judgment of the Punjab High Court is whether the Election Tribunal, Rohtak, was justified in dismissing the election petition under sub-s. (3) of s. 90 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereafter referred to as the Act) preferred by the appellant on the ground that it did not comply with the provisions of s. 82 of the Act. 2. The appellant is a voter in 64-Hissar city constituency of the Punjab Legislative Assembly and the respondent was a candidate for election to the Assembly from that constituency, the polling in which took place on February 24, 1962. Eleven persons had been nominated for election from that constituency, one of whom was Suraj Bhan, brother of the respondent. Five candidates, including Suraj Bhan, withdrew their candidature within the time prescribed for the purpose with the result that names of only six candidates were published under s. 38 of the Act. Several grounds were set out ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC975; [1965]35CompCas388(SC); [1965]1SCR403
Hidayatullah, J.1. This is an appeal by certificate against the judgment of the High Court of Bombay dated July 29, I960 in a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution reversing the decision of the Life Insurance Tribunal, Nagpur dated December 30, 1959, The proceedings arose from the taking over of the controlled business of the Continental Mutual Assurance Company Ltd,, Poona by the Life Insurance Corporation under the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956). The Insurance Company was a mutual Company and thus had no share capital. It received deposits from Directors and other persons and the respondents V. V. Oak and S. V. Oak had made five deposits totalling Rs. 7,408.8 IP. in the last weeks of December 1950 and 195*. These deposits carried interest at 4i% per annum. The Insurance Company was incorporated in 1946 and carried on only life insurance business. As required by the Insurance Act, 1938 (4,of 1938), it caused actuarial investigation and valuation to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1293; [1965]1SCR360
Hidayatullah, J.1. These are fifty-five writ petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution invoking Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution against the State of Mysore and the Mysore Public Service Commission in respect of appointments made to certain services in the Mysore State. The petitioners who were applicants for some of the posts were unsuccessful while others were appointed. In some of the petitions the successful candidates are joined as respondents. The facts are as follows : By a notification dated September 26, 1959, the Mysore Public Service Commission announced that a competitive examination would be held for direct recruitment for Class I and Class II posts relating to certain Administrative Services and numerous applicants including the petitioners themselves as candidates. On September 5, 1960, the Public Service Commission modified the earlier notification and instead of holding an examination announced that the selection would be made solely on the results of a viv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1267; [1965]57ITR17(SC); [1965]1SCR336
Subba Rao J. 1. This appeal by special leave raised the question of the scope of the retrospective operation of the U.P. Agricultural Income-tax (Amendment) Act, 1956 (U.P. Act No. 14 of 1956). 2. The facts are simple and they are as follows : On January 10, 1953, for the assessment year 1952-53, the Additional Collector, Banaras, assessed the appellant to agricultural income-tax under then U.P. Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1948 (U.P. Act 3 of 1949). On February 9, 1956, U.P. Agricultural Income-tax (Amendment) Ordinance, 1956 (2 of 1956) was passed enacting that the word 'Collector' shall always be deemed to include Additional Collector. That Ordinance was later replaced by the U.P. Agricultural Income-tax (Amendment) Act 14 of 1956. On an application filed by the appellant, the Collector by his order dated May 9, 1956, revoked his earlier order and directed the Additional Collector to proceed to assess the appellant in accordance with law. Thereupon, the Additional Collector resumed ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1227; [1965]35CompCas259(SC); [1965]55ITR707(SC); [1965]1SCR340
Subba Rao, J. 1. This appeal by certificate raises the question whether loss of cash by dacoity is an admissible deduction under section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter called the Act, in computing the assessee's income in a banking business. 2. The facts relevant to the question raised may be briefly stated. The assessee is the Nainital Bank Limited. It is a public limited company which carries on the business of banking. It has various branches and one of them is situated at Ramnagar. In the usual course of its business large amounts were kept in various safes in the premises of the bank. On June 11, 1951 at about 7 p.m. there was a dacoity in the bank and the dacoits carried away the cash amounting to Rs. 1,06,000 and some ornaments etc. pledged with the bank. For the assessment year 1952-53 the bank claimed the said amount as a deduction in computing its income from the banking business on the ground that it was a trading loss. The Income-tax Officer disallowe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1275; [1965]1SCR350
Mudholkar, J. 1. Eleven clerical employees serving the Corporation of Delhi have moved this Court under Art. 32 of the Constitution for quashing an order dated November 5, 1958 made by the Commissioner of the Corporation of Delhi and issuing a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction requiring the respondents to give effect to a resolution dated November 1/8, 1957 passed by the Executive and Finance Sub-Committee of the now defunct Municipal Committee of Delhi. The main ground on which the reliefs are claimed is that the action of the Commissioner in making the order has resulted in discrimination against the petitioners. 2. In order to appreciate the point some facts have to be stated. Prior to the year 1948 the Municipal Committee recruited matriculates and non-matriculates as clerks in the junior grade of Rs. 35-2-65-3-95. In order to attract better qualified persons they offered Rs. 45 as starting salary for graduates in this grade. Thereafter the Committee, b...
Tag this Judgment!