Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1567; 1973(0)BLJR605; 1971CriLJ1168; (1971)1SCC885; [1971]SuppSCR329
Ray, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order of the Patna High Court dated 30 October, 1967 dismissing an application in the criminal revisional jurisdiction against the judgment of the First Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi dated 31 July, 1967 upholding the conviction and sentence passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ranchi. The appellant was convicted under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500 and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months.2. There was a proceeding under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code between the respondents and the appellant regarding some land in the village Hatma in the district of Ranchi in the State of Bihar. The land was recorded in the names of two brothers Karma Ahir and Faizu Ahir. The appellant is the grandson of Karma Ahir. Faizu Ahir had two sons by his first wife. Both of them died during his lifetime. The respondent and his brother Sahdeo Mah...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1182; 1973(0)BLJR502; 37(1971)CLT539(SC); (1971)2SCC236; [1971]SuppSCR319
Hegde, J.1. In this appeal by certificate the vires of Rule 111 of the Rules framed under Section 90 of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 is in issue. The appellant, Indian Mica & Micanite Industries contends that the said Rule is ultra vires the Constitution. The High Court of Patna rejected that contention.2. In the High Court various contentions came up for consideration. The High Court has come to the conclusion that the levy made under the impugned rule is a fee. That finding was not challenged before us by any of the parties. Therefore all that we have to see is whether the fee levied is within the permissible limit. In other words whether there is sufficient quid pro quo for the levy in question.3. The appellant is a consumer of denatured spirit. It purchases denatured spirit from the wholesalers or the manufacturers for the purpose of manufacturing micanite. The Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (Bihar & Orissa Act 2 of 1915) came into force on January 19, 1916. In pursuanc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1554; (1971)3SCC466
A. N. Ray, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment dated 9 February, 1970 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana convicting the appellant under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Mohinder Singh and confirming the death sentence imposed upon him by the Sessions Court.2. The appellant was sentenced by the Sessions Court to death on three counts, namely, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the murder of Mohinder Singh and under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the murder of Mukhtiar Singh alias Mukha and Lachhman Singh. Kala Singh was sentenced by the Sessions Court to life imprisonment on two counts under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Mukhtiar Singh alias Mukha and Lachhman Singh. Both of them preferred appeals to the High Court. The sentence of death passed by the Sessions Court on Chanan Singh was before the High Court for confirmation.3. The High Court acquitted Kala Singh and a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1188; (1971)1SCC843; [1971]SuppSCR294
Sikri, C.J.1. This appeal, by certificate granted by the High Court of Gujarat under Article 132 and Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, is directed against its judgment and order dismissing the present appellant's petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The appellant is the owner of Survey Nos. 219/1 and 121 situated on the outskirts of Mahuva in Bhavnagar District. By notification dated April 25, 1969, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the State Government declared that the above-mentioned lands were needed for the public purpose of construction of an Industrial Estate by the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation or were likely to be needed for that purpose. On May 3, 1969 a notice was issued to the appellant by S.O. Collector, Officer on Special Duty, Land Acquisition, informing the appellant that if he had any objection to the acquisition of the lands, he might file objections on or before August 16, 1969. He was further informed t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1519; [1971(22)FLR260]; (1971)ILLJ416SC; (1971)2SCC68; [1971]SuppSCR305
Dua, J.1. The appellant in this appeal by certificate granted by the Andhra Pradesh High Court on February 25, 1965 under Article 133(1)(b) of the Constitution is the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh. A large number of writ petitions by various parties were filed in the High Court praying for writs in the nature of mandamus directing the appellant to forbear from enforcing or taking other proceedings under the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Act) and the Provident Fund Scheme, 1952. With the exception of perhaps one writ petition, all the rest, including W.P. 907 of 1963 presented by T.S. Hariharan, Proprietor, New Cochin Cafe, Ongole, respondent in this Court were dismissed. Certificates under Article 133(1)(b) of the Constitution were secured by the appellant in almost all the cases but the present is the only appeal which now survives, all the rest having been dismissed for nonprosecution.2. The writ petition of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1971SC1210; [1971]41CompCas591(SC); (1972)3SCC196; [1971]SuppSCR299; 1971(III)LC638(SC)
Grover, J.1. This is an appeal by certificate from a decree of the Patna High Court in a suit instituted by the appellant against the State of Bihar which was impleaded as defendant No. 1, the other defendants being the Jagdishpur Zamindari Company Ltd. (defendant No. 2) and some of its directors defendants 3 to 5.2. According to the allegations in the plaint one of the methods of making advances followed by the plaintiff Bank was that the constituents pledged their merchandise on a cash credit system with the Bank and took advances on the pledged goods. The Bank held the goods as security for the advances made and the constituents either provided the Bank with godown or the Bank kept the pledged goods in godowns of its own and charged rents from the constituents. The defendant No. 2 entered into a cash credit system agreement with the plaintiff's Arrah Branch, the arrangement being that the sugar would be pledged under the cash credit system. On December 16, 1946 the advance made to d...
Tag this Judgment!