Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1436; [1966]3SCR441
Sarkar J.1. The appellant, an Iranian national by birth, came to India from Yezd in Iran with his maternal uncle, an Iranian national, in 1938 when he was about thirteen years old. The record does not show on what passport he entered India. In January 1945 he obtained an Iranian passport and went to Iraq on pilgrimage. This passport showed that he held an identity card of the Iranian Government. On return from the pilgrimage he was on March 22, 1946 registered under the Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1939 as an Iranian national. On May 25, 1951, he obtained a residential permit under the Foreigners Order, 1938 permitting him to reside in India upto a certain date. This permission was extended from time to time at his request. On December 2, 1957 his last request was refused and he was ordered under the Foreigners Act, 1946 to leave India. On December 14, 1957, he filed a suit in the City Civil Court at Bombay for a declaration that he was a citizen of India and for an injunction res...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1408; (1966)GLR957(SC); [1966]3SCR437
Bachawat, J. 1. On August, 3, 1960, the Government of Gujarat issued a notification under s. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) stating that the land measuring about 7151 sq. yards in Final Plot No. 460 of the Town Planning Scheme No. III of Elisbridge in Ahmedabad taluka city, village Changispur, was likely to be needed for a public purpose, viz., for construction of houses for Shri Krishnakunj Government Servants Co-operative Housing Society, Ltd., Ahmedabad. The land is the subject-matter of a trust of which appellant No. 1 is the trustee and appellants Nos. 2 to 6 are the beneficiaries. An enquiry under s. 5-A of the Act was duly held, and a report under s. 5A(2) was made to the Government. On July 18, 1961, the State Government issued a notification under s. 6 of the Act stating that the land was needed to be acquired for the aforesaid public purpose at the expense of Shri Krishnakunj Government Servants Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. On Se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1624; [1966]3SCR423
Shah, J. 1. In 1936 certain home farm land in Mouza Belam Bujurg, Paragana Burwaha, of the estate of the respondent were leased for cultivation to one Mangtya by Court of Wards which was in management of the estate. The Court of Wards released the estate on June 14, 1951. The respondent thereafter terminated the tenancy and instituted a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Class II, Burwaha, against Mangtya for a decree in ejectment and for mesne profits. The Trial Court decreed the suit for possession and awarded mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 300/- per annum from the date of decree till delivery of possession. The decree passed by the Trial Court was confirmed in appeal by the District Court, Nimar, and the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. Sons of Mangtya, who died after the judgment of this High Court have preferred this appeal with special leave. 2. The land in dispute is ryotwari land and Mangtya was a ryotwari sub-lessee of the land. It was contended before the High Court in Rao Niha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1485; [1966]3SCR427
Shah, J. 1. Ramgopal - respondent in this appeal - was a tenant of certain Inam land situate in village Nanda Panth in Indore Tahsil. The appellant Rao Nihalkaran - holder of the Inam - served a notice terminating the tenancy on the ground that he needed the land for personal cultivation, and commenced an action in the Court of the Civil Judge, Class II, Indore, on July 21, 1950, against Ramgopal for ejectment. The Trial Court decreed the suit. During the pendency of the appeal to the District Court, Indore, by Ramgopal against the decree, Madhya Bharat Muafi & Inam Tenants and Sub-tenants Protection Act 32 of 1954 was enacted, and pursuant to the provisions thereof hearing of the appeal remained stayed till 1960. In the mean time the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code (Act 20 of 1959) was brought into force. Ramgopal urged before the District Court that he had by virtue of s. 185 of the Code acquired rights of an occupancy tenant and the appellant's right to obtain an order in ejectment...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1966]3SCR412
Sarkar, J. 1. These three appeals concern compensation payable under the Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, 1952 to the appellants for abolition of their inams. Some of the appellants held shares in the inam village of Wanz and some in that of Dindoli. The appellants had moved the High Court at Bombay by several petitions under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution for quashing the decision of the Bombay Revenue Tribunal regarding the compensation. The petitions were disposed of by the High Court by a common judgment. These appeals are against that judgment under a certificate granted by the High Court. 2. The appellants had claimed compensation under several heads based on different grounds but two of them survive. The first is that the appellants are entitled to compensation for loss of assessment payable to them by inferior holders, a special class of tenants holding lands from them. The Act does not expressly provide for compensation in respect of such lands. Sub-section (1) of s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1571; (1967)IILLJ751SC
P. Satyanarayana Raju, J. 1. These appeals, on certificate granted by the High Court of Mysore, raise the question of the constitutional validity of the Mysore Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (Act XIV of 1961).2. By virtue of the provisions of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, a new State known as the State of Mysore was formed comprising the territories of the then existing State of Mysore, certain districts in the then existing States of Bombay and Hyderabad, South Kanara district in the State of Madras except certain parts thereof and the then existing State of Coorg. The legislature of the new State of Mysore enacted the Mysore Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (Act XIV of 1961), hereinafter referred to as the Act. It received the assent of the President on July 8, 1961. Sub-section (3) of Section 1 authorised the State Government to fix a date for the commencement of the Act. By notification, dated January 9, 1963, the Government of Mysore notified that the said Act shall...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1555; [1966]3SCR393
Bachawat, J. 1. The parties are Aulakh Jats of Tehsil Ajnala in Amritsar District, and are governed by customary law in matters of succession and adoption. The dispute concerns succession to the property of one Santa Singh alias Din Mohammad. Santa Singh has not been heard of for a long time and is presumed to be dead. The revenue authorities sanctioned mutation of the lands left by him in favour of the defendants, who are his collaterals of the 8th degree. One Megh Singh was the collateral of Santa Singh in the 5th degree. Megh Singh died more than 50 years ago. Before his death, he adopted his daughter's son, one Kala Singh. Kala Singh has died leaving his sons, Dewan Singh and Gian Singh as his heirs. Dewan Singh and Gian Singh instituted a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, First Class, Ajnala praying for a decree for possession of the lands left by Santa Singh and alleging that Megh Singh adopted Kala Singh as his son, took him out of his natural family, transplanted him ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1300; [1966]3SCR400
Mudholkar, J.1. In this appeal by special leave from a judgment of the High Court ofAndhra Pradesh the question which arises for consideration is whether theinterest of a partner in partnership assets comprising of movable as well asimmovable property should be treated as movable or immovable property for thepurposes of s. 17(1) of the Registration Act, 1908. The question arises in thisway. Members of two joint Hindu families, to whom we would refer forconvenience as the Addanki family and the Bhaskara family, entered intopartnership for the purpose of carrying on business of hulling rice,decorticating groundnuts etc. Each family had half share in that business. Thecapital of the partnership consisted, among other things, of some landsbelonging to the families. During the course of the business of the partnershipsome more lands were acquired by the partnership. The plaintiffs who are twomembers of the Addanki family instituted a suit in the court of SubordinateJudge, Chittor on March 4...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1342; [1966]60ITR392(SC); [1966]3SCR379
Subba Rao, J.1. These two appeals, one by special leave and the other by certificate, raise the question whether notice can be issued at any time for reassessment under s. 34(1)(a), as amended by the Finance Act, 1956, of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter called the Act, in respect of a concealed income to which s. 34(1A) thereof applied. 2. The facts may be briefly stated. Messrs. Shahzada and Sons, the 1st respondent in both the appeals, was an undivided Hindu Family firm and it was assessed in that capacity up to the assessment year 1945-46. It is alleged that subsequently there was a partition in the family and a new firm came into existence, which took over the business of the family. On March 26, 1954, the Income-tax authorities issued a notice to the members of the defunct Hindu undivided family under s. 34(1)(a) of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1945-46 on the ground that certain income of the said family had escaped assessment. Pursuant to the proceedings...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1216; [1966]3SCR352; [1966]17STC473(SC)
Sikri, J.1. These two appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the Madras High Court in Tax Cases Nos. 100, 219, 220 and 225 of 1962, and involve the interpretation of s. 5(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act (64 of 1956) - hereinafter referred to as the Act. The relevant facts are these. The appellant K. G. Khosla and Co., hereinafter referred to as the assessee entered into a contract with the Director-General of Supplies and Disposal, New Delhi, for the supply of axle-box bodies. According to the contract the goods were to be manufactured in Belgium, and the D.G.I.S.D., London, or his representative, was to inspect the goods at the works of the manufacturers. He was to issue an inspection certificate. Another inspection by the Deputy Director of Inspections, Ministry of W.H. & S., Madras, was provided for in the contract. It was his duty to issue inspection notes on Form No. WSB. 65 on receipt of the copy of the Inspection Certificate from the D.G.I.S.D. London and ...
Tag this Judgment!