Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC361; [1966]1SCR110
Sarkar, J. 1. By an unregistered instrument of lease dated February 3, 1953, therespondent let out a piece of vacant land in the town of Coimbatore to theappellants for the term of one year at a rent of Rs. 30/- per month. Thetenants held over after the expiry of the term reserved and the tenancy wascontinued. The lease provided that the tenants 'shall not raise anybuilding whatsoever in the vacant site' but they committed a branch of thecovenant by putting up a building on the land. 2. On December 4, 1956, the lessor filed a suit for ejectment of the tenantsand their sub-tenants. Pending the suit, the Madras City Tenants' ProtectionAct, 1921, was on February 19, 1958 made applicable to the town of Coimbatoreand thereupon the tenants made an application in the suit under s. 9 of the Actfor an order directing the lessor to sell the land to them. The trial Court, alearned Sub- Judge in first appeal and Anantanarayanan J. in second appeal tothe High Court of Madras held that the tenants w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC153; 1965MhLJ764(SC); [1966]1SCR102
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. This appeal by special leave arises out of proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1939 (No. 28 of 1939) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The respondents Maruti Hari Jadhav and twoothers moved the B.A.D.R. Court at Karad on May 26, 1949,for adjustment of the debt alleged to he due from them to the appellants, Pandurang Dhondi Chougule & others. Their case was that the debt in question was due under a mortgage deed executed by their grand-father in favour of the grand-father of the appellants on August 29, 1881. By this mortgage, six agricultural lands situated at Kapil in the former State of Oundh had been mortgaged to the mortgagee with possession for a sum of Rs. 575. In 1908, the respondents' predecessors-in-interest sued on this mortgage in the Court of the Sub-Judge at Kapil (Civil Suit No. 28 of 1908-09). This suit was, however, withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh suit. Then followed another suit by the re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1965]57ITR588(SC)
Sikri, J.1. These two appeals pursuant to a certificate granted by the High Court of Mysore under section 66A(2) of the Income-tax Act are directed against the judgment of the High Court answering the question referred to it in favour of the respondent-assessee. The question referred to is :Whether the assessee, Messrs. Shah Jethaji Phulchand can be granted registration under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax act on the basis of the deed made on November 20,1950, for the assessment year 1953-54 and/or 1954-55 ?'2. The relevant facts are these. The respondent M/s. Shah jethaji Phulchand hereinafter called 'the assessee', is a firm constituted by a partnership deed dated November 20, 1950. The assessee sought registration of the firm under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act for the assessment years 1953-54 and 1954-55. The deed of partnership was entered into between five years : (1) Nathmal Jethaji, (2) Phulchand, (3) S. Babulal, minor son of jethaji; (4) Sakalchand Thikmaji an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1966CriLJ1519; [1966]SuppSCR265
The Judgment of Sarkar, C.J. and Mudholkar, J. was delivered by Mudholkar, J., Bachawat, J. delivered a separate Opinion. Mudholkar, J.1. The Additional Sessions Judge, Kumaon, after convicting the appellant Sita Ram of an offence under s. 302, Indian Penal Code for the murder of his wife Sindura Rani, has sentenced him to death. The High Court of Allahabad affirmed his conviction but reduced the sentence to one of imprisonment for life. 2. The fact that Sindura Rani met with a homicidal death is not in dispute. What is, however, contended on behalf of the appellant is that there is no evidence on the basis of which his conviction could be based. Admittedly there are no eye-witnesses to the occurence. The prosecution case against him rests on the following material : (1) motive; (2) opportunity; (3) subsequent conduct; (4) false explanation and (5) confessional statement. 3. There is ample evidence on record to show that the relations between the appellant and his wife were very much s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC305; [1966]36CompCas165(SC); [1965(11)FLR137]; (1965)IILLJ175SC; [1966]1SCR25
Hidayatullah, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the award of the NationalIndustrial Tribunal (Bank Disputes), Bombay, in a dispute between the ReserveBank of India and its workmen, delivered on 8 September, 1962, and published inthe Gazette of India (Extraordinary) of 29 September, 1962. The appellants arethe All India Reserve Bank Employees' Association, Bombay (shortly theassociation), representing Class II and Class III staff and the All IndiaReserve Bank D Class Employees' Union, Kanpur (shortly the union), representingclass IV staff, of the Reserve Bank. 2. By notification No. S.O. 704 dated the 21st March 1960, the CentralGovernment, in exercise of its powers under s. 7B of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947, constituted a National Industrial Tribunal with Mr. Justice K. T. Desai(later Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court) as the Presiding Officer. By anorder notified under No. S.O. 707 of the same date, Central Government, in theexercise of the powers conferred by su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1848; [1966]1SCR87
Wanchoo, J.1. These 37 appeals on certificates from the judgment of the Mysore High Court raise common questions and will be dealt with together. The appellants are motor bus operators in the district of Bellary in the State of Mysore. It appears that two draft schemes for taking over passenger bus routes were published by the State Transport Undertaking (hereinafter referred to as the Undertaking) in May 1962. Objections 10 those schemes were heard by the State Government and the schemes were approved after some modifications and published in the Mysore ga/.ette in August 1962. The approved schemes were however challenged by the motor bus operators who were operating in the district before the High Court by writ petitions and the two schemes were quashed by the High Court on September 24, 1962, for reasons into which it is unnecessary to go.Then the Undertaking published another scheme on November I, 1962 in the Mysore gazette for taking over the routes mentioned therein to the entire...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1942; [1965]57ITR643(SC); [1966]1SCR64; [1965]16STC613(SC)
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. The principal point of law which arises in this appeal is whether the Bombay High Court was right in holding that the suit filled the appellant, Kamla Mills Ltd. against the respondent, the State of Bombay, was incompetent. The appellant is a limited company and owns textile mills at Bombay. It carries on the business of manufacturer and sale of textile both. During the period 26th January, 1950, to 31st March, 1951, the appellant was registered as 'Dealer' under the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1946, (No. V of 1946) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The appellants. case is that during the said period, it sold goods inside and outside the state of Bombay. The total value of goods sold by the appellant outside the State of Bombay was Rs. 40,20,623-12-0 and Rs. 1,08,946- 14-0. On the said sales of Rs. 40,20,623-12-0 general sales tax of Rs. 61,885-12-0 was levied, whereas on the sales of Rs. 1,08,946-40-0 special sales tax of Rs. 3,301-8-0 was levied. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1698
J.R. Mudholkar, J.1. The question which we have to consider in this appeal by special leave is whether the trial Judge was right in granting leave to the appellants to defend the suit based upon promissory notes executed by the appellant No, 1, which was instituted on the original side of the High Court at Bombay on condition that the appellants deposited security to the extent of Rs. 70,000. The other appellants are sought to be made liable upon an indenture of guarantee dated 20-11-62 with respect to the amounts advanced to the appellant No. 1. The procedure followed in the case was that set out in Order 37, Civil Procedure Code. Rules 2 and 3 of this Order have been amended by the Bombay High Court. Sub-rule 1 of Rule 2 provides that suits of certain kinds specified therein may be instituted by presenting a plaint in the form prescribed but the summons shall be in Form 4 in Appendix III or in such other Form as may from time to time be prescribed. Suits upon bills of exchange, hundi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC302; 1965(0)BLJR914; 1966CriLJ197; [1966]1SCR18
Hidayatullah, J.1. In these two appeals by nine persons, who have been convicted under s.302/149, Indian Penal Code, special leave is limited to one question of law,namely, whether the accused could be legally convicted under the above sectionswhen they were not charged and convicted under s. 147 or s. 148 of the IndianPenal Code It appears from the judgment under appeal that there was adifference of opinion on this point in the High Court at Patna and the appealsin the High Court were disposed of by a full Bench which held that chargesunder Sections 147 and 148 were not necessary before conviction under s. 302, IndianPenal Code could be made with the aid s. 149, Indian Penal Code. 2. In view of the limited nature of the appeals only the essential facts maybe stated. The person who lost his life was one Misari who was related to someof the accused persons. In the past there were other incidents. In 1955 oneAjablal was murdered and some of the present accused were prosecuted but wereacq...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1965SC1905; [1965]57ITR532(SC); [1966]1SCR8
Shah, J.The appellant carried on business at Nuzvid as a money-lender and conducted a cinematograph theatre. In respect of income from property and business she submitted a return of her income for the assessment year 1947-48 and disclosed in a statement, dated August 26, 1949, that Sita Devi-Maharani of Baroda-had between November 10, 1945 and February 11, 1948 'out of natural love and affection' given to her some jewellery and four amounts of money which aggregated to Rs. 5,20,000/-. The Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Vijayawada, accepted the appellant's statement and did not treat the money and jewellery received by her as taxable income. In the course of assessment proceedings for the year 1951-52 the Income-tax Officer was inclined to treat the money and jewellery given to the appellant as remuneration for services rendered to Sita Devi as a maid-servant. He accordingly issued a notice under s. 34 of the Income-tax Act and called upon the appellant to 'submit an explanation a...
Tag this Judgment!