Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1188; 1973CriLJ914; (1973)3SCC805; [1973]3SCR463; 1973(5)LC598(SC); 1973()WLN98
I.D. Dua, J.1. In this appeal by special leave from the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court Ram Narain, appellant, challenges his conviction for the offences under Sections 462 and 120B, I.P.C. He, along with three others, had been committed for trial in the court of Sessions Judge, Kota on ten charges for offences under Sections 467, 468, 420 and 120B, I.P.C. It is not necessary to reproduce all the charges and it would suffice if we set out the charges under Sections 467 and 120B, I.P.C., because by the impugned judgment of the High Court the appellant's conviction was sustained only on charges under these two sections. Those charges are :1. That you between the months of November, 1959. to January, 1960, at your house at Dadvada entered into a conspiracy with Sarvashri Madan Mohan, Badriprasad and Bakshi Gajpatsingh and others, to commit offences of forgery using forged documents as genuine and of cheating the public, Municipal Board and the Government in respect of the sale of som...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC926; 1973CriLJ940; (1973)1SCC497; 1973(5)LC590(SC)
Alagriswami, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad confirming the sentence of death passed on the 1st appellant and the sentence of life imprisonment passed on the 2nd appellant by the Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge, Banda.2. The first appellant is the father and the second appellant is the son. They and another son of the first appellant, Lasra, were prosecuted for causing the death of one Ramji on 22.8.1969 in the village of Pachokkar in the district of Banda. On that day at about 11 a.m. P.W. 5, Uma Prasad, the son of the deceased was taking his buffalo through the follow land of the accused for grazing. The second appellant took objection to it and beat the buffalo and when this was objected to by Uma Prasad he caused two injuries on him with the end of his lathi. Uma Prasad narrated the incident to his father Ramji and his uncle Ram Murti, P.W. 1. Ramji thereupon seems to have given a few slaps to the second appellant. Ther...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC921; (1973)1SCC572; [1973]3SCR454
A. Alagiriswami, J.1. These two appeals by special leave are against the judgment of the High Court of Delhi allowing the appeals filed by the two respondents.2. The respondents are landlords of two houses in the Karol Bagh area of Delhi. The houses are built on lands given on long lease by the Delhi Improvement Trust to the rights, liabilities and assets of which the Delhi Development Authority has since succeeded.3. Under the terms of the lease, subject to revision of rent, the lessees were to put up residential buildings on the leased lands and the lessees undertook :(vi) not to use the said land and buildings that may be erected thereon during the said term for any other purpose than for the purpose of residential house without the consent in writing of the said lessor; provided that the lease shall become void if the land is used for any purpose than that for which the lease is granted not being a purpose subsequently approved by the lessor. 4. The present landlords are not the or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC927; [1973]88ITR192(SC); (1973)1SCC442; [1973]3SCR448; 1973(5)LC583(SC)
K.S. Hegde, J.1. This appeal by certificate arises from the decision of the Calcutta High Court in a case stated by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Calcutta. After setting out the relevant facts, the Tribunal solicited the opinion of the High Court on the following question of law :Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in calculating the penalty leviable under Section 271(1)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 the amount paid by the assessee under the provisional assessment under Section 23B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was to be deducted from the amount of tax determined under Section 23(2) of that Act in order to determine the amount of tax on which the computation of the penalty was to be based and in reducing the amount of the penalty imposed on the assessee to Rs. 2,737/-.2. The High Court answered that question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved by that decision, the Commission...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1050; (1973)1SCC454
D.G. Palekar, J.1. These petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution are filed by Rita Kumar and Suresh Elwadhi complaining about discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution. Both of them are repatriates from Burma, the former having come to India in January, 1965 and the latter in October, 1964. Both are citizens of India and are qualified for entry to the M.B.B.S. course. It appears that the Government of India introduced a scheme under which a certain number of seats in Government Medical Colleges are reserved for pre-medical and M.B.B.S. courses for repatriates from Burma, Ceylon, Mozembique and new migrants from Bangla Desh. Pursuant to the scheme an advertisement was published on 3-6-1972 inviting applications from qualified repatriates from the above areas in prescribed forms. Repatriates claiming reservations of seats were required to produce a certificate. A note appended to the certificate is as follows:Note: For the purpose of issuing the above certificate a bona ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1196; 1973CriLJ921; (1973)1SCC696; [1973]3SCR438
S.M. Sikri, C.J.1. The same point of law arises in both the writ petitions and it will suffice if acts in writ petition No. 164 of 1972 are set out. The petitioner, Ramanlal Bhogilal Shah, was the General Manager ot United Commercial Bank Ltd. till January 17, 1968 when he became the Chairman and wholetime Director of the said bank. Upon nationalisation of the bank, the petitioner was appointed Custodian thereof and he continued as Custodian till September 1, 1971.2. On June 4, 1966 the United Commercial Bank had booked a forward exchange contract for Hindustan Motors for 9,32,617 at the rate of is. 529/32d, per rupee. On June 6, 1966. the rupee was devalued. On May 24, 1971 the petitioner was served with summons under Section 19-F of the Foreign Exchange (Regulation) Act, 1947-hereinafter referred to as the Exchange Act to give evidence in the enquiry which Shri D. K. Guha, Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate, was making into certain offences, under the Exchange Act. The petition...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1052; (1973)1SCC593; [1973]3SCR430
A.N. Ray, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution asks for quashing of orders of the respondent Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Meerut dated 2 May, 1972.2. By the said order dated 2 May, 1972 the respondent Deputy Registrar removed Rajendra Singh, Yograj Singh and the petitioner Veerpal Singh from the Board of Directors of the District Co-operative Federation, Bulandshahr referred to as the Bulandshahr Federation and declared them to be disqualified to the office of the Directors of the Bulandshahr Federation for a period of three years from the date of the order.3. Rajendra Singh, Yograj Singh and the petitioner Veerpal Singh were delegates from the Co-operative Unions of Jarcha, Raura and Unchagaon respectively to the Bulandshahr Federation.4. The circumstances under which the aforesaid order came to be passed are these according to the Deputy Registrar. There was an inspection in the month of February, 1971 by the Deputy Registrar. Co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1100; (1973)1SCC564
I.D. Dua, J.1. This is an appeal on certificate under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution granted by the Allahabad High Court from its judgment dated March 7, 1969 convicting the three appellants for an offence under Section 109 read with Section 465, I.P.C2. The three appellants Raghunath Prasad, Viswanath and Pyarelal were tried for offences under, inter alia, Sections 114/465, 114/467, 114/468, I.P.C. and Section 82(d) of the Indian Registration Act. Raghunath Prasad was in addition tried for an offence under Section 471, I.P.C. The Second Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge, Kanpur acquitted them of the offences under the Penal Code on the ground that it was not safe to convict them on the sole testimony of the complainant Smt. Sukh Devi. So far as the offences under Section 82(d) of the Registration Act is concerned there was the additional ground for acquittal, namely, absence of sanction of the registration authorities for their prosecution under Section 82 of that Act. The nec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1249; (1973)1SCC456
A.N. Ray, J.1.The petitioner in this writ petition impeaches the order dated 14 July, 1971 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Meerut, By that order the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies suspended the President and the committee of management of Jahangirabad Cooperative Marketing Society Ltd., Jahangirabad. The petitioner Veerpal Singh was the President of the Jahangirabad Cooperative Marketing Society. By that order the Deputy Registrar further appointed Ghanshyam Murari Sharma, Additional District Cooperative Officer, Bulandshahr as Administrator to carry on the functions of the society.2. The appeal is from the order dated 29 November, 1971 of the Allahabad High Court dismissing in limine the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. In that petition the appellant Yograj Singh and others challenged the aforesaid order dated 14 July, 1971 suspending the President and the committee of management of Jahangirabad Cooperative Marketing Society.3. Two questi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC2373; (1973)4SCC110; [1973]3SCR424; [1973]32STC655(SC)
K.S. Hegde, J.1. These are appeals by special leave. They are filed by the same assessee. They arise from the decision of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The judgment under appeal not only deals with references made under the U.P. Sales Tax Act 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) but also the two Writ Petitions filed by the assessee.2. The assessee who is a registered dealer under the Act is having his business at Kanpur. It carries on business in hydrogenated oil and washing soap. It also imports and distributes vanaspati as an agent of Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Company Ltd., Indore.3. In these appeals we are concerned with the assessee's assessment of sales tax for the assessment year 1957-58. Its return for that year disclosed a gross as well as net turnover of Rs. 1,66,387.03 P. Along with its return the assessee paid Rs. 1,060.30P. towards the tax due. Before the assessing authority the assessee admitted that its tax liability was Rs. 10,339.19P. It is admit...
Tag this Judgment!