Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1970)3SCC196; 1971(III)LC58(SC)
S.M. Sikri, J.1. This is a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the petioner's detention. It was stated in the petition that the petitioner was arrested on June 25, 1970 and was detained in Police Station Koti Bagh till June 26, 1970 without any warrants. It was further stated that the petitioner was not served with any warrants at the time of arrest but was made to sign the warrants of detention issued from the District Magistrate Srinagar, in Central Jail after the lapse of over ten days.2. This Court issued rule nisi and assigned a Counsel to appear as amicus curiae.3. The Deputy Secretary to the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, Home Department, has filed an affidavit on behalf of the State It is stated therein that the District Magistrate, Srinagar, by order dated June 25, 1970, ordered that the petitioner be detained under the Jammu and Kashmir Prevention Detention Act, 1964, with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC266; 1971CriLJ284; (1970)3SCC489; 1971(III)LC56(SC)
S.M. Sikri, J.1. The petitioner filed a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that he had been re-arrested after serving four years' of detention in different jails of the State under the Preventive Detention Act and the Defence of India Rules, and that he was arrested on June 14, 1970 and was kept in Police Station Koti Bagh till June 30, 1970 without any warrants He prayed that the Superintendent of Jails, Srinagar, be directed to produce him before this Court for pleading his case.2. Upon perusing the petition this Court ordered the issue of rule nisi and directed a Counsel to be assigned as amicus curiae.3. The Deputy Secretary to Government of Jammu and Kashmir, Home Department, has filed an affidavit in reply on behalf of the State. In this affidavit it is stated that the District Magistrate, Srinagar, ordered vide order No. PDA/DMS/85/70 dated June 25, 1970, that the petitioner be detained under the Jammu and Kashmir, Preventive Detention Act, 1964 with a view t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1971)3SCC787; 1971(III)LC55(SC)
M. Hidayatullah, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab dismissing an appeal against the judgment of a learned Single Judge in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Division Bench relied upon an earlier decision of the Court reported.in Samadh Parshotam Das v. Union of India and Ors. I.L.R 1962 1086. The facts of the case are as follows :2. The appellant is Asthan Bhagat Dwara and is conducting the proceedings through one Khem Singh. The case had a chequered career in the Rehabilitation Department. The claim was for allotment of certain lands which the Asthan Bhagat Dwara had lost as a result of partition of India. The facts need not be referred to in detail, because numerous orders have been pas ed by the various authorities. The final order was in revision before the Chief Settlement Commissioner, Jullunder, Punjab by which he dismissed the revision application which arose from the cancellation of allotment of lan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1482; (1971)1SCC67; [1971]2SCR623
Shelat, J.1. Prior to January 18, 1944 M/s. Lakshmiratan Cotton Mills Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the appellant-company), Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the corporation, J.K. Limited, Beharilal Kailashpat India Supplies, Northern India Trading Co., and Northern India Brush . were all jointly managed by two groups, who may conveniently be called the Singhania and the Gupta groups. Disputes having arisen between them, they were-referred to arbitration by a deed of reference, dated December 9, 1943. It is not necessary to go into the details of the award, dated January 18, 1944, by which these disputes were adjudicated upon except that from and after the date of the award the aforesaid concerns were brought under the management and control of one or the other of the said two groups. The corporation came under the control and management of the Singhania group.2. Clause 9 of the award provided as follows :The above award or directions in respect...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1970)3SCC301; 1971(III)LC59(SC)
M. Hidayatullah, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab in Civil Writ Application No. 1975 of 1963 decided on 18th December, 1963, The petitioner was allotted 170 standard acres and 8 units of lands in village Mallewala, Tehsil, Sirsa, District Hissar in lieu of lands abandoned by him in five villages in Tehsil Depalpur, District Montgomery. This was done on his application as Mahant Gaddinashin of an institution known as 'Gaddi Kacha Pacca' in Tehsil Depalpur. According to him, he had re-established that institution in village Mallewala after the partition of India and was, therefore, entitled to get lands in lieu of lands which the institution had lost across the border. Later the Chief Settlement Commissioner considered the entire matter and held that the lands could not have been allotted to the appellant in lieu of lands which belong to 'Gaddi Kacha Pacca' presumably because the 'Gaddi Kacha Pacca' was incapable of being moved to another place an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC369; (1971)1SCC12; [1971]2SCR640
Grover, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court.2. In December 1966 Labhu Ram who was the owner of the land in dispute sold the same in two lots to Bhagwan Das (deceased) now represented by his legal representatives and others. The lands mentioned in Clauses (a) and (b) of the title of the plaint in the suit out of which the present appeal has arisen were sold for Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 1,000/- respectively. The respondent Chet Ram was a tenant-at-will of the lands covered by the sales. Bhagwan Das and Others filed a suit against Chet Ram in the revenue court for ejectment under Section 14A(i) read with Section 9(1) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act 1953 which was decreed on July 31, 1967. On August 31, 1968 Bhagwan Das and Others entered into possession of the aforesaid lands after evicting Chet Ram by virtue of the decrees for eviction obtained against him.3. After his eviction Chet Ram the present respondent filed a suit for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC57; 1972(0)BLJR1; (1971)1SCC7; [1971]2SCR650
Hidayatullah, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court at Patna, dated January 15, 1964, affirming the decision of the court of first instance. The case arose in the following circumstances :2. One Chaudhary Lal Behari Sinha, who was the uncle of the two plaintiffs (respondents in this appeal), made an endowment by a will executed by him on December 2, 1908, by which certain properties were endowed in favour of an Idol called 'Ram Janakiji' also known as Shri Thakurji, installed in the family house of the testator. The testator said that his parents had installed this idol inside their house and they used to perform the puja and he had also been performing the puja since the time he had attained the age of discretion. The testator went on to say that he had married two wives but no son had been born to him from either of them, although he had a daughter and there was also a daughter's daughter. When he made the will, he had his two wives living, two sister's sons...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC458; 1972(0)BLJR497; 1971CriLJ420; (1970)2SCC905; [1971]2SCR619
Sikri, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises the question of the applicability of the rule of issue-estoppel. The appellant, Gopal Prasad Sinha, was tried on a charge under Section 409, I.P.C., for having committed criminal breach of trust of Rs. 27,800/- during the period between January 31, 1960 and November 30, 1960, while acting as a cashier of the Public Works Department, East Division, Gaya. The Assistant Sessions Judge framed three points for determination :'1. If the accused Gopal Prasad Sinha was a Public servant and was working as cashier in the office of the Executive Engineer, P.W.D., Gaya East Division, during the period between 31-1-60 to 30-11-60 ?'2. Whether charge amount namely Rs. 27,800/- was entrusted to the accused or he had dominion over it in his capacity as a public servant ?3. Whether the accused committed criminal breach of trust in respect of this charge amount ?'2. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, after going through the oral and documentary evidence...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC267; (1970)3SCC576
J.C. Shah, J.1. At a bye election held in April 1967 to elect a member of the Lok Sabha from the Srikakulam parliamentary constituency there were two contesting candidates -Boddepalli Rajagopala Rao-hereinafter called 'the appellant' - and N.G. Ranga-hereinafter called 'the respondent'. The respondent was declared elected. The appellant filed an application in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh to set aside the election of the respondent on the ground that the respondent had committed diverse corrupt practices described in Section 123(1)(A)(a), (b), (5) and (6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The respondent denied the allegations made in the petition. He also submitted that the allegations were vague and indefinite and some of those allegations did not constitute any corrupt practice within the meaning of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The appellant amended the petition and submitted particulars of certain corrupt practices set out in the original petition. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC32; (1971)1SCC1; [1971]2SCR645
Hidayatullah, C.J.1. The appellant files his appeal by special leave against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the Mysore High Court, February 25, 1966, by which the appeal of the State Government in a civil matter was allowed and the order of dismissal of the appellant who is a former police constable was confirmed. His cross-objection was dismissed.2. The appellant was a police constable serving in the Dharwar District. He joined the police force on August 1, 1945 in the former State of Bombay. On the States Reorganisation, he came under the jurisdiction of the State of Mysore and it was on November 26, 1953 that he was dismissed after a departmental enquiry against him on the following facts. The petitioner had proceeded on leave for a month from January 1, 1953. On January 26, 1953, he applied for extension of leave for a month. A reply was received by him refusing leave, but only on February 21, 1953. He made a second application for extension of leave on the same date, ...
Tag this Judgment!