Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC651; [1973]88ITR53(SC); (1973)3SCC491; [1973]2SCR1057
H.R. Khanna, J.1. These two appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of Calcutta High Court whereby it answered the following question referred to it Under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 in the negative in favour of the revenue :Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in excluding from the assessable income of the assessee for the assessment years 1953-54 and 1954-55 the sums of Rs. 56,586 and Rs. 39,542 which were the amounts of dividend received by the assessee's wife and two sons from shares acquired out of the profits of the assessee?2. The matter relates to assessment years 1953-54 and 1954-55, the corresponding previous years for which ended on March 31, 1953 and March 31, 1954 respectively. The appellant-assessee is the Managing Director of Messrs Hotels (1938) Ltd. and other associated companies controlling a number of hotels in India. For the assessment years 1953-54 and 1954-55, the appellant sh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC655; (1973)75PLR264; (1973)1SCC179; [1973]2SCR1064; 1973(5)LC467(SC)
A.N. Grover, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Patna High Court in a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale of certain properties described in Schedule 1 of the plaint.2. The facts to the extent they are material may be stated. The suit which was filed by Babu Thakur Prasad Singh & others in 1943 was on the basis of a contract for sale made in 1931 by Saroda Charan Guha (deceased)-defendants First Party in the suit and Babu Ambika Prasad Singh and others-defendants second party to whom defendant first party had actually sold the properties in dispute. It was alleged, inter alia, in the plaint that the total sale consideration was Rs. 99,995/-. Out of that sum, Rs. 23,000/- had already been paid to defendant first party. It was further stated that defendant second party in spite of full knowledge of the agreement between the plaintiffs and the defendant first party purchased the suit properties for Rs. 1,63,400/-by means of a deed of sale dated...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC623a; [1973]88ITR47(SC); 1973MhLJ651(SC); (1973)3SCC346; [1973]2SCR1050
K. S. Hegde, J.1. These are appeals by certificate. They arise from a reference Under Section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (To be hereinafter referred to as the Act). These appeals relate to the Wealth Tax assessment of the appellant assessee for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59, the relevant valuation dates being December 31, 1956 and December 31, 1957.2. The two questions of law referred to the High Court are:1. Whether on a true construction of the indenture of trust dated 11-6-1941 the trustees of the Trust constitute an assessable unit under the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act ?2. Whether the property held by the trustees under the indenture of trust dated 11-6-1941 is held for any public purpose of a charitable or religious nature in India within the meaning of Section 5(1)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act ?The High Court has answered both these questions in favour of the Department and against the assessees. Hence these appeals.3. The facts of this case lie within a narrow...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC816; (1973)1SCC175
A.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal by special leave is from a judgment and Order passed by a Single Judge of the Bombay High Court on 22 June 1972. The appeal arises under rather peculiar circumstances which may be briefly set out as hereunder.2. In January 1961 there was an agreement between the respondent and his landlords in regard to the purchase of a flat and two shops being, main shop No. 35A and a small shop No. 35. Various disputes arose out of this agreement with the details of which we are not concerned. On 9 March 1964 the landlords filed a suit in the Bombay High Court in which the landlords asked, as an alternative relief, for the ejectment of the respondent from the flat and the main shop No. 35A. The suit was numbered O.O. C.J. Suit No. 100 of 1964. The appellants who were in possession of the main shop No. 35A were made party defendants. On 17 October 1964 the respondent filed a countersuit against the landlords for specific performance of the agreement to purchase the sm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC239; (1973)3SCC333; [1973]2SCR1043; 1973(1)SLJ162(SC); 1973(5)LC452(SC)
I.D. Dua, J.1. This appeal is by special leave and is directed against the order of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated September 3, 1965 dismissing the appellant's writ petition.2. The appellant, a teacher of Araria Higher Secondary School was dismissed from service by the Managing Committee of the said school at a meeting held on February 27, 1958 on a charge of misappropriation of school money. On appeal by him the President of the Board of Secondary Education, set aside the order of dismissal by order dated April 22, 1960 and directed his reinstatement in service. By the same order of reinstatement a further direction was given that the appellant should be paid full salary, dearness allowance and increment from the date of his suspension till the date of reinstatement after adjusting the amount already paid. When this order was received by the Managing Committee it was obeyed so far as the reinstatement of the appellant is concerned but the Managing Committee requested the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC254; [1973]88ITR323(SC); (1973)3SCC482; [1973]2SCR1035
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. This is an appeal by certificate against the judgment of the High Court of Calcutta rendered on a reference under Sub-section (1) of Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The assessee, it appears, had filed voluntary returns of income for the assessment years 1955-56 to 1959-60 giving her address as 5/A Bysack Street, Calcutta which was then within the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer, 'J' ward, District I (1) Calcutta. The return for 1958-59 was dated 22nd August 1959 while the assessments for the other years were antedated. It also appears from the order sheet that the Income-tax Officer had directed issue of notice Under Section 23(2) in respect of five years on 14th December 1959 which notices were purported to have been received personally by the authorised representative of the assessee on the same date. The cases were heard on 21st and 23rd December 1959 and the assessment for these years was complet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC258; (1973)3SCC319; [1973]2SCR1025
A. Alagiriswami, J.The petitioner was an officer of the Indian Army who served in Bangla Desh. On 11th December, 1971-he was in a place called Hajiganj. He was tried before the Summary General Court Martial on the charge of committing robbery at Hajiganj by causing fear of instant hurt to the Custodian of the United Bank Ltd., of certain properties belonging to the Bank and also the personal property of the Manager of the Bank as well as of a Chowkidar of the Bank. The Court sentenced the petitioner to be 'cashiered'. This sentence was subject to confirmation under the provisions of Chapter XII of the Army Act. Maj-Gen. Hira, General Officer Commanding, 23 Mountain Division, of which the petitioner was an officer, passed an order directing the revision of the sentence. Thereafter the petitioner was brought before the same Court Martial, as had tried him earlier, and he was asked whether he wanted to address the Court. On receiving a reply in the negative, the Court, after considering t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC659; 1973CriLJ602; (1973)3SCC680
I.D. Dua, J.1. The five appellants in this appeal by special. leave were tiled in the court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli for offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. Accused Nos. 1 and 4 were sentenced to death under Section 302, I.P.C. the injuries inflicted by them on the deceased having been held to be fatal whereas accused Nos. 2 and 3 were sentenced to imprisonment for life the injuries caused by them to the deceased being simple but with the common intention of causing his death. Accused No. 5 was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 149 read with Section 302, I.P.C. because he had only instigated his associates to kill the deceased. Accused Nos. 1 to 4 were not awarded any separate sentence under Section 148, I.P.C. and accused No. 5 was similarly not awarded any sentence under Section 147, I.P.C.2. The High Court, on appeal confirmed the conviction and sentences of accused Nos. 1 to 4 but so far as ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC201; 1973CriLJ267; (1973)3SCC669
C.A.Vaidialingam, J.1. This appeal by the first accused, on certificate, is against the judgment and order dated the 15th November, 1967, of the Allahabad High Court confirming the conviction and sentence for an offence under Section 368, I.P.C.2. According to the prosecution, the second accused kidnapped a minor child of Smt. Gomti Devi at about 4.00 A. M. on November 6, 1963. P. W. 1 had given birth to a male child at the Dufferin hospital at Bareilly on the evening of November 5, 1963. The second accused, who was the sister of an aya working in the said hospital, was noticed on the evening of November 5, moving about near the bed where Gomti was lying with her new-born baby. She was noticed by P. W. 12 and on enquiry, she told the latter that she was waiting to see some patient in the clean ward. At about 4.00 A. M. on November 6, 1963, the second accused took away the new-born male child from P. W. 1 on the representation that the staff nurse wanted to do the cord dressing of the c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC665; 1973CriLJ608; (1973)3SCC803
A. Alagiriswami, J.1.This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Madras confirming the sentence of death passed on the appellant.2. The wife of P.W. 10. Hussain Khan, had some lands which the appellant and his father had been cultivating for some years. They fell into arrears in respect of the lease amount due to the landlady. It was alleged that the appellant and his father voluntarily surrendered the land on 16-2-69 and on the same day a lease was executed in favour of P.W. 3. The prosecution case was that on 5-1-70 when P. Ws. 1 to 5 went to harvest the second crop raised by P.W. 3, the appellant and others came and at tacked the persons who were harvest ing the crop which resulted in the death of one Velayudhan. The contention on behalf of the appellant and others was that they had never sur rendered the possession of the land, that they had themselves raised the crop and the landlord was trying to evict them with the help of P. Ws. 1, to 5 and when...
Tag this Judgment!