Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1549; [1965]3SCR27
Hidayatullah, J. 1. This appeal arises from a suit filed by respondents 1 and 2 for declaration of their rights to the Phulpur Estate, for possession of properties belonging to the Estate and for mesne profits. The Phulpur Estate is situated in Allahabad District. One Rai Bahadur Rai Pratap Chand who died on January 23, 1901, was the Zamindar of this Estate. After his death, his widow Rani Gomti Bibi succeeded to the Estate. Rani Gomti Bibi was considerably influenced by her brother Gaya Prasad and priests belonging to some temples. In the years following the death of her husband, Rani Gomti Bibi made many endowments involving vast properties and in July 1920, the Court of Wards assumed charge of the Estate which the Rani was mismanaging. On February 21, 1923, the Rani adopted one Bindeshwari Prasad and then applied to the Court of Wards under s. 37 of the U.P. Court of Wards Act for permission to make the adoption. The Collector (Mr. Knox) made an enquiry and on April 3, 1923, made a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1965]57ITR1(SC)
ORDER. - In accordance with the majority judgment, the appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.Appeal dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1965]3SCR1; 1965AIR1862
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 414 of 1965. Appeal from the judgment and order dated February 21, 1962, of the Punjab High Court in I.T. Reference No. 9 of 1959. N.C. Chatterjee and R.V. Pillai, for the appellant. C.K. Daphtary, Attorney-General, R. Ganapathy lyer, R.N. Sachthey for R.H. Dhebar, for the respondent. The Judgment of SUBBA RAO, MUDHOLKAR and RAMASWAMI JJ. was .delivered by SUBBA RAO, J. The dissenting Opinion of DAYAL and BACHAWAT JJ. was delivered by BACHAWAT J. Subba Rao, J. This appeal by certificate raises the main question whether s. 2(6A)(d) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter called the Act, is ultra vires the Central Legislature. The assessee, a public limited company, was incorporated on May 23, 1945, under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, with a share capital of Rs. 50 lakhs. On December 15, 1947, at the instance of the appellant the High Court sanctioned the reduction of the capital of the company from Rs. 50 lakhs to Rs. 25 lakhs. On...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1486; 1965MhLJ510(SC); [1965]2SCR929
Hidayatullah, J. 1. In this appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Bombay dated February 14, 1964, the only question is whether the delegation by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of his functions under sections 105B to 105E to certain officers of the Corporation was valid and proper. This question arises in the following circumstances : One Govind Hari was a monthly tenant of room No. 23 of a chawl at Chandanwadi. After his death in 1961 the tenancy devolved on his widow Anusuyabai, who took in a boarder. The chawl belonged to the Municipal Corporation and proceedings were taken to eject Anusuyabai and the boarder under Chapter VI-A of the Municipal Corporation Act. These proceedings were initiated by one of the officers to whom the powers of the Commissioner were delegated by him under section 68 of the Act. After due enquiry the officer passed an order evicting these persons. An appeal was filed under section 105F of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1965]16STC772(SC)
Hidayatullah, J.1. In this appeal by special leave the Indian Copper Corporation Ltd. impugns a judgment of the Patna High Court dated April 12, 1961, arising from a petition in the High Court under Article 225 of the Constitution. By that petition the Corporation challenged certain review proceedings pending before the Superintendent of Sales Tax as the result of an application by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna, asking for review of the previous order in the light of the decision of this Court in State of Bombay and Another v. United Motors (India) Ltd. and Others : [1953]4SCR1069 ; 4 S.T.C. 133. The application by the Commissioner was made in the following circumstances :-The Corporation is a company incorporated in England and it carries on its business and trade in India at Ghatsila, District Singhbhum, in the State of Bihar. It is registered as a dealer under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947. The Corporation used to deposit sales tax in advance with the Sales Tax ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC128; 1966CriLJ106; [1965]2SCR894
Mudholkar, J.1. This appeal and Criminal appeal No. 113/63 arise out of a joint trial of the appellant Mangaldas and the two appellants Daryanomal and Kodumal in Crl. A. 113 of 1963 for the contravention of section 7(v) of The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in which they were convicted and sentenced under section 16(1)(a) of the Act. The appellants Mangaldas and Daryanomal were each sentenced under section 16(i)(a)(ii) of the Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 while the other appellant was sentenced under sub-cl (i) to undergo imprisonment until the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 200. On appeal they were all acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik. The State preferred an appeal before the High Court of Bombay which allowed it and restored the sentences passed on Mangaldas and Daryanomal by the Judicial Magistrate but imposed only a fine of Rs. 200 on Kodumal. They have ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1636; [1965]56ITR365(SC); [1965]2SCR908
Gajendragadkar, C.J. 1. When this appeal was argued before a Division Bench of this Court on October 23, 1964, it was urged on behalf of the appellant, the Keshav Mills Co. Ltd., that in view of the present decisions of this Court in The New Jehangir Vakil Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay North, Kutch and Saurashtra : [1959]37ITR11(SC) , and Petlad Turkey Red Dye Works Co. Ltd., Petlad v. The Commissioner of Income-tax, the Bombay, Ahmedabad [1963] 1 S.C.R. 871 appeal must be allowed and the case sent back to the Bombay High Court for disposal in accordance with the principles laid down in the latter decision. At that stage, the learned Attorney-General for the respondent, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay North, Ahmedabad, urged that he wanted this Court to reconsider the said two decisions. He fairly conceded that if the said two decisions were to be followed, the appeal would have to be allowed and sent back as suggested by the appellant. The learned Judges cons...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1965]2SCR934
Subba Rao, J. 1. Sri Vaidyanathaswami Temple at Vaitheeswarankoil, Sirkali Taluk, Thanjavur District, Madras State, is an ancient and famous Siva temple. It owns a large extent of immovable property and it is said that its annual income is more than Rs. 2 lakhs. In 1842 the British Government, which was then administering the temple, handed over its management to the Pandarasannadhi of Dharmapuram Adhinam. Since then the said Pandarasannadhi has been managing the same through one of his selected disciple, a Kattalai Thambiran. In the year 1919, the High Court of Madras framed a scheme for the administration of the said temple in A.S. No. 181 of 1917. The said scheme provided, among others, that the administration of the temple should be in the hands of the Kattalai Thambiran appointed by the Pandarasannadhi, and that he should be assisted by a treasurer, a shroff and an auctioneer who was to be appointed once in 3 years' by the Court. The Madras Legislature passed Act II of 1927 provid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1623; [1965]2SCR884
Shah, J.1. The appellant Mohd. Ayub Khan petitioned the High Court of Madras for a writ of mandamus restraining the Commissioner of Police, Madras, from taking action pursuant to the order of the Government of Madras. Home Department, No. 83546, dated May 28, 1958 and from interfering with the appellant's rights as a citizen of India. The petition was dismissed by Balakrishna Ayyar, J., and the order was confirmed in appeal by a Division Bench of the High Court. With certificate granted by the High Court, the appellant has appealed to this Court. 2. The appellant, who claims that he had acquired the status of an Indian citizen on the commencement of the Constitution as a person who had been ordinarily resident in the territory of India for not less than five years immediately preceding the date, was served with a notice dated July 17, 1957 informing him that as he had obtained Pakistan Passport No. 071377, dated April 1, 1953 he should leave India within one month from the date of serv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1557; 1965MPLJ669(SC); [1965]2SCR877
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. This appeal by special leave arises out of an Election petition filed by respondent No. 1, Harikishan Singh, challenging the validity of the election of the appellant, Bhaiyalal, in a reserved seat in the Berasia Constituency in the direct of Sehore in Madhya Pradesh. The election in question was held in February, 1962; at this election the appellant, respondent No. 1, and three others offered themselves as candidates. The appellant was declared duly elected on the February 26, 1962 since he had polled the highest number of votes. His next rival was respondent No. 1. By this petition, respondent No. 1 challenged the validity of the appellants election on the ground that the appellant belonged to the Dohar caste and was not a Chamar. The appellant had filed his nomination paper on the January 19, 1962 before the Returning Officer at Sehore and had declared that he was a member of the Chamar scheduled caste of the State of Madhya Pradesh in relation to Sehore distr...
Tag this Judgment!