Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC1805; (1975)2SCC411; [1976]1SCR188; 1975(7)LC687(SC)
P.K. Goswami, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Mysore High Court (now High Court of Karnataka) of February 9. 1973, rejecting the appellant's writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by which the orders of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal had been challenged.2. Briefly the facts are as follows: The appellant was granted a stage carriage permit under Section 48 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (briefly the Act) for the route Devenagere to Shimoga via Honnali by the Regional Transport Authority, Shimoga, by its order dated May 3/4, 1963. Some of the respondents preferred appeals against the said order to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and obtained stay of the order. The appeals were, however, dismissed on September 27, 1963. Again, some of the respondents preferred further appeals to the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal against the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC1996; [1975]100ITR715(SC); (1975)2SCC399; [1976]1SCR180; 1975(7)LC621(SC)
A.G. Gupta, J.1. This appeal by special leave turns on the true meaning and scope of explanation 2 to Section 24(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.2. The appellant (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) is a private limited company carrying on business in tea garden tools and requisites and also acting as agents for selling tea, in fact the bulk of its income was from selling commission on tea. The assessment year in question is 1959-60; in the relevant previous year which ended on June 30, 1958, the assessee for the first time in its history entered into certain transactions in jute. On April 17, 1958 the assessee had contracted to purchase 100 bales of B-Twill and 2500 bales of corn sacks; the contract for B-Twill with two parties, M/s. Raghunath and Sons (P) Ltd. for 500 bales and M/s. Mahadeo Ramkumar for 600 bales. The corn sacks were all purchased from Tahsildar Jawaraj under three contracts for 800 bales, 1000 bales and 700 bales respectively. On June 18, 1958 the assessee enter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC2182; (1976)1SCC43; [1976]1SCR191
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. We have already announced our order in this appeal on the 2nd May 1975 reported in 1975 U.J. (SC) 496. We now proceed to give our reasons therefore.2. The appellant, Shri Ram Autar Singh Bhadauria Respondent No. 1 Chaudhari Ram Gopal Singh and Respondents 2 to 11 contested election, as rival candidates from U.P. Legislative Assembly Constituency (No. 293), Sarsaul. The poll was held on 24-2-1974. The appellant was declared elected. The total number of votes polled was 72735. Out of these, the appellant secured 23626 and Respondent 1, his nearest rival polled 23604, the margin being of 22 votes only.3. Respondent 1 filed an election petition challenging the election of the appellant inter alia on the ground (vide para 9(1) of the petition) that the result of the election so far as the returned candidate was concerned materially affected by improper reception and rejection of votes and mistakes in counting. It was alleged:Para 11(a). That in a number of polling statio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC2001; (1975)4SCC590
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. Jarnail Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and one Gurmail Singh were tried by the Sessions Judge, Ludhiana for the murder of Ajmer Lal. Gurmail Singh died during the pendency of the trial. Mukhtiar Singh and Jarnail Singh were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rupees 1000/-. They were further convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment, each. The sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. On appeal, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana acquitted them by its judgment, dated 6-11-1973. Aggrieved by that acquittal, the State of Punjab has now come in appeal to this Court after obtaining special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution.3. The accused-respondents are real brothers. Ajmer Lal deceased and Ramji Dass P.W. are also brothers. They were plying their private cars as taxis in Ludhiana and the surrounding areas. There was pro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC2057; [1975(31)FLR135]; (1975)IILLJ326SC; (1975)2SCC818; [1976]1SCR168
S. Murtaza Fazl Ali, J.1. This is an appeal by the management of M/s. Mahabir Jute Mills situated at Gorakhpore by a certificate granted by the High Court of Allahabad under Article 133 of the Constitution of India. M/s. Mahabir Jute Mills Mazdoor Sabha was formed some time in the year 1946 and soon thereafter when Shibban Lal Saxena one of the respondents was elected as President of the Labour Union of the Mill disputes arose between the workers and the Company as a result of which Shibban Lal Saxena sent notice to the management on December 31, 1946 threatening a general strike. Thereafter several disputes arose between the parties which were sometimes settled, sometimes reopened and in this appeal we are not concerned with those matters. In the previous disputes the order of the management retrenching some workers was upheld by the Regional Conciliation Officer and against that Shibban Lal Saxena served a notice of strike listing 18 demands and calling upon the management to reinsta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC2254; (1975)2SCC624; [1976]1SCR159; 1975(7)LC674(SC)
A.N. Ray. C.J.1. These six appeals are by certificate from the judgment dated 23 January, 1968 of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in G.M.A. No. 210 and 374 of 1967 in that High Court.2. Two questions arise for decision in these appeals. First, whether in the circumstances of the case, there was any property of the Hyderabad Cooperative Commercial Corporation Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the Cooperative Society which could be attached by the decree holders, the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 1708 of of 1969 and Civil Appeal No. 2539 of 1969 in the hands of the Director of Civil supplies. Second, whether the dissolution of the Hyderabad Co operative Commercial Corporation Ltd. by the Registrar of Co operative Societies was competent.3. Syed Mohiuddin Khadri, here in after referred to as the decree holder, obtained on 24 August, 1959 a decree from the City Civil Court, Hyderabad against the Co operative Society for a sum of Rs. 6,91,293.11 Ps. with interest.4. On 23 Novem...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC1985; 1975CriLJ1739; (1975)4SCC609
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. The appellants and one Tulsi Das were charged for offences under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants were also charged for offence under Section 148 and Tulsi Das for offence under Section 147. The Sessions Judges, Hamirpur acquitted the appellants and Tulsi Das of all the offences charged against them, The State preferred an appeal against the order of acquittal and the High Court partly allowed the appeal so far as the appellants were concerned, and, setting aside the order of acquittal, convicted the appellants of offences under Section 302 read with Section 149 as well as Section 148 and sentenced each of them to suffer life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 and two years' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 148 with a direction that both sentences should run concurrently. The acquittal of the appellants for offence under Section 201 read with Section 149 was confi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC1991; (1975)2SCC394; [1976]1SCR152; [1975]36STC232(SC)
H.R. Khanna, J.1. This judgment would dispose of civil appeals No. 1988 and 1989 of 1970, filed on certificate against the judgment of the Kerala High Court, whereby that court held that it was beyond the competence of the State Legislature to enact law contained in Sub-Section (3) of Section 22 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (Act 15 of 1963) (hereinafter referred as the Act) in so far as it related to payment of an amount collected as tax on transactions not liable to tax under the Act or in excess of the tax leviable under the Act.2. We may now set out the facts giving rise to one of the appeals. Both the learned Counsel are agreed that the decision in that would also govern the other appeal.3. Under Section 5 of the Act, tax is payable by a dealer on his tax able turnover, 'Taxable turnover' is defined in Section 2(XXV) of the Act as the turnover on which a dealer is liable to pay tax as determined after making such deductions from his total turnover and in such manner as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC1852; (1975)IILLJ359SC; (1975)4SCC676; [1976]1SCR148; 1976(1)SLJ10(SC); 1975(7)LC660(SC)
A. Alagiriswami, J.1. This appeal raises the question of the validity of the appointment of the appellant as a professor of zoology in the University of Saugar.2. In pursuance of an advertisement dated 31-5-1971 by the University calling for applications for the post of Professor of Zoology five persons including the appellant and the respondent applied A Committee of Selection was constituted in accordance with Section 47-A of the Saugar University Act 1946 to consider these applications. On 4-12-1971 the Selection Committee recommended the name of the appellant to the Executive Council, which was competent to make the appointment. Under the provisions of Section 47-A the Executive Council has to make the final selection from among persons recommended by the Selection Committee. But where the Executive Council proposes to make appointment otherwise in accordance with the order of merit arranged by the committee the Executive Council should record its reasons in writing and submit its ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1975]101ITR24(SC); (1975)2SCC454
Y.V. Chandrachud, J.1. The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court of Madras under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge an assessment order dated August 22, 1963, made by the respondent, levying additional surcharge on its residual income. The High Court dismissed the writ petition by its judgment dated October 15, 1968, but it has granted to the appellant a certificate to file an appeal to this Court under Articles 133(1)(a) and (c) of the Constitution.2. The appellant is a co-operative society engaged in the business of banking. Its total income for the assessment year 1963-64 was computed by the respondent at Rs. 10,00,098. Out of this, Rs. 9,48,335 was its business income while Rs. 51,763 was its income from other sources. . Since under Section 81(i)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, a co-operative society engaged in the business of banking is not, liable to pay income-tax on its business income, the tax amounting to Rs. 23,845.47 was charged on Rs. 51,763 only thou...
Tag this Judgment!