Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC602; (1966)IILLJ147SC; [1966]1SCR994
Wanchoo, J.1. These appeals by special leave raise common questions and will be dealt with together. We shall take the facts of one appeal (No. C.A. 237) in order to understand the questions in dispute and it will be unnecessary to refer to the facts in other cases for they are admittedly similar.2. Nanjappa, respondent in C.A. 237 of 1964, was a trained teacher and was headmaster of a Government Boys' Middle School. He completed the age of 55 years on February 3, 1958 and was ordered to be retired from service from that date on the- ground of superannuation. Thereupon he filed a writ petition in the High Court of Mysore, and the main contention raised on his behalf was that Rule 294 (a) of the Mysore Service Regulations (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which prescribed the age of retirement of Government servants, had been amended with respect to trained teachers from April 29, 1955, and in the case of such teachers the normal age of superannuation was fixed at 58 years i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1068; 1966MhLJ371(SC); [1966]1SCR988
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. The short question of law which arises in this appeal is whether a suit filed in pursuance of O. 21 r. 63 of the Code of Civil Procedure attracts the provisions of s. 80 of the Code. This point arises in this way. One Phool Chand, the predecessor-in-title of the appellant Sawai Singhai Nirmal Chand, instituted a suit against the respondent, the Union of India, in the Court of the Second Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, and obtained a decree on 25-4- 1951 for Rs. 24,234-14-0 and proportionate costs with interest @ 4% per annum. The respondent challenged the said decree by preferring an appeal in the High Court. Pending the appeal, the respondent deposited the decretal amount of Rs. 31,849-9-9. On December 14, 1952, Phool Chand withdrew Rs. 28,032-12-0 out of the said amount after furnishing due security in that behalf. Ultimately, the respondent's appeal was partly allowed on June 26, 1954, and the decretal amount was reduced to Rs. 10,971-15-6. In the result,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC707; 1966(0)BLJR207; [1966]1SCR974
Gajendragadkar, C.J. 1. This appeal raises a short question about the construction of Regulation 4 of the Regulations framed by the Academic Council of appellant No. 3, the Patna University, under s. 34(b) of the Patna University Act, 1951 (Bihar Act XXV of 1951). The respondent Kalyan Srinivas Raman was a student who appeared at and passed the test examination held by the Patna College for sending up students for the University examination B.A. Part I. His name was shown in the list of candidates who were eligible to appear for the said University Examination and this list was published on March 26, 1965 by the college authorities. On March 29, 1965, however, a notice was put up on the notice-board by appellant No. I, the Principal of the Patna College, indicating that the respondent was not eligible to be sent up for the said University Examination, 1965 and that his roll number had been included in the list published earlier due to a clerical mistake. The respondent felt aggrieved b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1603; [1966]1SCR908
Bachawat, J.1. Sri Sarangadevar Peria Matam of Kumbako-nam was the inamholder of lands in Kannibada Zamin, Dindigul Taluk, Madurai District. In 1883, the then mathadhipathi granted a perpetual lease of the melwaram and kudiwaram interest in a portion of the inam lands to one Chinna Gopiya Goundar, the grandfather of the plaintiff-respondent on an annual rent of Rs. 70. The demised lands are the subject-matter of the present suit. Since 1883 until January 1950 Chinna Gopiya Goundar and his descendants were in uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the suit lands. In 1915, the mathadhipathi died without nominating a successor. Since 1915, the descendants of Chinna Gopia Goundar did not pay any rent to the math. Between 1915 and 1939 there was no mathadhipathi. One Basavan Chetti was in management of the math for a period of 20 years from 1915. The present mathadhipathi was elected by the disciples of the Math in 1939. In 1928, the Collector of Madurai passed an order resuming the inam...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC969; [1966]1SCR915
Subba Rao, J.1. This appeal by certificate raises the question whether the village of Mothirambedu is a Zamindari estate under the Madras Estates [Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari] Act 1948 [Madras Act XXVII of 1948], hereinafter called the Act. 2. The facts may be briefly stated. Mothirambedu village is one of the shrotriem villages in the Chingleput district in the state of Madras. The respondent purchased the same from one P. Anathapadmanabacharlu under a sale deed dated July 10, 1946, for a sum of Rs. 26,000/- and was in possession and enjoyment thereof. On December 12, 1950, the Government of Madras issued a notification under s. 3 of the Act taking over the said village as a Zamindari estate. The Government took possession of the same on January 3, 1951. On March 15, 1954, the respondent filed O. S. No. 22 of 1954 in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Chingleput, against the State of Madras for a declaration that the said notification of this village as Zamindari estate un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1292; [1966]1SCR929
Wanchoo, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises a question as to the interpretation of s. 37-A of the Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, No. VII of 1936 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The respondents brought a suit in the court of the Second Munsif, Burdwan for a declaration that they were entitled to the property in dispute, for confirmation of their possession thereof and for a permanent injunction restraining the appellant from interfering with their possession. In the alternative they prayed for delivery of possession to them of the property in dispute in case it was found that they were not in possession. The case of the respondents was that the property in dispute belonged to one Jatindra Mohan Hajra, who was the father of three of the respondents. He mortgaged the property to Kali Krishna Chandra who was a defendant in the suit. Kali Krishna Chandra obtained a mortgage decree in the Court of the Subordinate Judge Burdwan and in execution of the said decree got the mortgag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC792; [1966]1SCR937
Shah, J.1. Khader Miran, Muhammad Abdul Kassim and Muhammad Labhai mortgaged on August 21, 1933, certain immovable property in favour of Narsimha Reddy to secure repayment of Rs. 20,000/- Khader Miran died on November 19, 1937. On July 12, 1940 Narsimha Reddy commenced an action for enforcement of the mortgage against Muhammad Abdul Kassim, Muhammad Labhai, and three widows of Khader Miran Fathima Bi, Amina Bi, and Mahaboob Bi, and a daughter Muhammad Mariyam Bi, A preliminary mortgages decree passed in the action on November 25, 1940 was made absolute on October 11, 1941, and in execution of the decree the properties mortgaged were sold at a court auction and were purchased by the mortgagee Narsimha Reddy on October 16, 1942, with leave of the Court. Narsimha Reddy thereafter transferred the properties to P. Chinnamma Reddi and the latter in his turn alienated portions thereof. 2. N. K. Mohammad Sulaiman - Hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff - claiming that he was the son of Khad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC849; 1966(0)BLJR369; 1966CriLJ697; [1966]1SCR885
Bachawat, J.1. The two connected appeals raise common question of construction of Sections 39 and 44 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and Rule 138 of the Indian Electricity Rules. 1956. The appellants in both appeals have been convicted under Sections 39 and 44 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and rule 138 [b] of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 130 of 1963 has also been convicted under s. 201 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The Patna Electric Supply Co. Ltd. supplied electrical energy in Patna, Patna City and Dinapur to about 22,000 consumers, of whom about 900 were industrial power consumers. The normal wastage of energy in course of transmission was 15 to 16 per cent of the units generated. In 1958, the Chief Inspector of the Company noticed an extra abnormal loss of about 8 per cent which could not be due to wastage in transmission and suspected extensive theft of the Company's electrical energy. Vigorous investigations were started, and a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC764; [1966]1SCR890
Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. The petitioner, Jawaharmal, carries on business of plying his motor buses on four routes under the State Carriage Permits granted to him under the relevant provision of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939. The three respondents to his petition respectively are : The State of Rajasthan, the Deputy Commissioner, Excise and Taxation [Appeals], Jaipur, and the Taxation officer, [The Rajasthan Motor Vehicles] Sikar, State of Rajasthan. It appears that respondent No. 3 passed several assessment orders imposing different amounts of tad against his five vehicles which were running on the four routes in question. The period fro which these assessment orders were passed differed from vehicle to vehicle; but on the whole, they covered the period between the 1st April, 1962 and the 30th September, 1964. The total amount of tax imposed in respect of these vehicles by the assessment orders in question is Rs. 19, 062-93 np. These orders have been passed under section 2 of the Rajastha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1686; [1966]1SCR865
Shah, J. 1. The appellants-Kalyani Stores - deal in liquor at Rourkela, District of Sundergarh in the State of Orissa. The appellants held a licence as retail vendors for ' all types of foreign liquor' under the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915. The expression foreign liquor apparently includes Ale, Beer, Port, Cider and other fermented Liquors, cordials, mixtures and other preparations containing spirit, perfumed spirit and all sorts of wines whether manufactured in India or aboard. Under the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 by a notification issued in 1937 under s. 27 a duty of Rs. 40/- per L. P. Gallon was imposed and realised by the State of Orissa on foreign liquor of Indian manufacture imported into state of Orissa from other parts of India. For the year April 1. 1960 to March 31, 1961 duty was levied on foreign liquor imported by the appellants at the rate fixed in the notification issued in 1937. On March 31, 1961 in exercise of the powers conferred by s. 90 of the Bihar & Or...
Tag this Judgment!