Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC608; 1977CriLJ376; (1977)1SCC180; [1977]2SCR240
M.H. Beg, J.1. A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the High Court of Delhi, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus 'or any other appropriate writ, direction or order', to restrain the respondents from carrying out the sentence of death passed against Amrit Bhushan Gupta, a person condemned to death for having committed culpable homicide amounting to murder. The petition was filed by Smt. Shanti Devi, purporting to act on behalf of her son Amrit Bhushan Gupta, who was alleged to be insane. A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court passed the following order on it:We have no doubt, in our minds that if the petitioner is really insane, as stated in the petition, the appropriate authorities will take necessary action. This petition, at this stage, we feel, does not justify invocation of the powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Criminal Writ is dismissed.2. Before the grant of special leave to the petitioner on 27th August, 1976, an applicat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC781; (1977)1SCC431; 1977(9)LC23(SC)
A.N. Ray, C.J.1. This appeal is by special leave from an order dated 15 September, 1976 passed by the High Court Punjab and Haryana in Civil Writ Petition No. 6176 of 1976.2. The High Court passed the following order:Admit Notice. There will be no interim order permitting the petitioner to manufacture liquor. There will be stay of dispossession. To be heard on 8 November 1976. 3. The State filed an application in Civil Appeals No. 866-867 of 1971 decided by this Court on 22 April, 1976, for initiating contempt proceedings under Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 against the respondent for not abiding (with sic) by the order of this Court. The second prayer in that application is direction that the appellant be restrained from proceeding with Civil Writ Petition No. 6176 of 1976 pending in the Punjab and Haryana High Court.4. Civil Appeals No. 866-867 of 1971 came up for heating on 17 March, 1976. On 19 March, 1976 they were adjourned at the instance of counsel for the appellants referred t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC640; (1977)1SCC791; [1977]2SCR250
Jaswant Singh, J.1. These three Appeals Nos. 1944, 1945 and 1946 of 1967 by certificate which are directed against the common judgment and decree dated July 29, 1964 of a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh involving a question of limitation shall be disposed of by this judgment.2. The facts leading to these appeals are : As appears from the pedigree-table referred to in the judgment under appeal, Chuhar Singh, a descendant of Amrika, son of Har Lal, sold land admeasuring 167 kanals and 10 marlas situate in village Dhugga, Tahsil Hoshiarpur, to Bhagwan Singh, the grandfather of defendants Nos. 1 to 6, for Rs. 2378/-vide a registered sale deed dated June 20, 1885. After the aforesaid alienation, one Hamira, a collateral of Chuhar Singh, filed a suit for possession by pre-emption of 52 kanals, 13 .marlas out of the aforesaid area which was decreed in his favour on April 29, 1889 on payment of Rupees 671/-. The mutation in respect of the remainder of the l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC660; (1977)1SCC216; [1977]2SCR226
H.R. Khanna, J.1. This appeal by special leave is against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, reversing on appeal the decision of learned single Judge, whereby notification dated April 23, 1966 issued by the State Government under Section 7(1) of the U.P. Land Acquisition (Rehabilitation of Refugees) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) had been quashed. As a result of the decision of the Division Bench the writ petition filed by the appellants to quash that notification stood dismissed.2. The Sufferers Co-operative Housing Society, Jaunpur, Respondent, applied to the U.P. Government in 1955 for acquiring four acres of land for the purpose of erecting houses, shops and workshops for the rehabilitation of the refugees who were members of that society. At the instance of the State Government, the society deposited a sum of Rs. 15,000 towards the cost of the land to be acquired. In 1964, the society entered into an agreement with the State Government un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC999; [1977]106ITR368(SC); (1977)1SCC691; [1977]2SCR220; 1977(9)LC31(SC)
H.R. Khanna, J.1. This appeal on certificate is against the judgment of Gujarat High Court whereby the High Court answered the following question referred to it under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961) in favour of the assessee-respondent and against the revenue: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was a transfer of a capital asset with the meaning of Section 45 read with Section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?2. The matter relates to the assessment year 1962-63, for which the accounting previous year was calender year 1961. The assessee who is an individual help 192 shares of Kawelengoji Ginneries Ltd., Kapala, a private limited company incorporated in Uganda (hereinafter referred to as the Uganda company). Those shares were acquired by the assessed sometimes before January 1,1954 and he paid Sh. 1000 for each share. The amount thus paid by the assessee for the 192 shares was Sh. 1,92,000, equivalent ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC619; 1977CriLJ433; (1977)1SCC188; [1977]2SCR232
S. Murtaza Fazi Ali, J.1. It is a peculiar feature of our criminal law that where a trespasser has succeeded in taking recent wrongful possession of the property vested in the public for common enjoyment, the members of the village or the real owner are not entitled in law to throw out the trespasser but have to take recourse to the legal remedies available, and if any member of the public tries to secure public property from the possession of the trespasser he is normally visited with the onerous penalty of law. This is what appears to have happened in this appeal by special leave in which the appellants appear to have got themselves involved in an armed conflict with the prosecution party resulting in the death of the deceased, injuries to some of the prosecution witnesses and injuries to three of the accused themselves.2. The prosecution case in short is that on July 18, 1966 at about 7-30 to 8-00 in the morning when Ram Khelawan and his companions were removing weeds from the paddy...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC567; 1977LabIC55; (1977)ILLJ331SC; (1977)1SCC472; [1977]2SCR198
Jaswant Singh, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated March 28, 1972 of the High Court of Delhi dismissing in limine the writ petition filed by the appellant herein.2. The facts essential for the purpose of this appeal are : The appellant was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on temporary basis in the pay scale of Rs. 68-170. which was subsequently revised to Rupees 118-225, in the Primary School, Northern Railway Colony II run by the Education Department of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, with effect from October 1, 1958. He was confirmed on the said post on September 30, 1959. On August 28, 1964, he was transferred to the Senior Basic Middle School of the Corporation in Panna Mamurpur, Narela II. In September 1967, he was assigned the work of teaching certain subjects to both the sections of Class V. In Section A of Class V, there was at that time a student named Surinder Kumar, son of Dhan Raj. On September 6, 1967, Dhan Raj made a wri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC615; (1977)ILLJ85SC; (1977)1SCC279; 1976(8)LC1012(SC)
M.H. Beg, J.1. The respondent was initially appointed as an Accountant on 10th July, 1969, in the Varayanasaya Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya Vanmasi (hereinafter referred to as 'the University'). On 4th December, 1969, he was transferred to another post, that of a 'Senior Assistant'. In January, 1970, Dr. Shambhu Nath Singh, who was the permanent Lecturer in Hindi in the University proceeded on long leave, and the plaintiff-respondent, being already in the service of the University, was asked to teach classes for the time being. Applications were invited for filling up the post of Dr. Singh. The advertisement said that the appointment was to be temporary but likely to be made permanent later. The plaintiff-respondent, who was already officiating, also applied. He was temporarily appointed on 25th February, 1970. On 23rd April, 1970, the Registrar of the University gave the plaintiff-respondent a notice that his temporary appointment would terminate on 20th April, 1970. The plaintiff-respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC625; (1977)1SCC213; [1977]2SCR178; 1976(8)LC1023(SC)
M.H. Beg, J.1. These appeals by special raise the question where the Kerala High Court had correctly interpreted and applied Section 8 of the Kerala Govt. Land Assignment Act, I960 (Hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to the cases before us. This provision reads as follows:8. All provisions, restrictions, conditions and limitations over, contained in any Pattah or other document evidencing an assignment of Government land shall be valid and take effect according to their tenor, and any rule of law or usage to the contrary hot-withstanding.2. The fact upon which the provision was sought to be applied are these. On 23 October, 1939, the Government of Travancore sanctioned a scheme for the reclamation of the Vembanad Lake upon terms and conditions which were set forth in a document dated 4 October, 1939. The agreement provided that one M.T. Joseph and his father, on payment if Rs. 10/- per acre, which were to be recovered in ten equal instalments, would be given possession of certain tr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC536; [1977]1CompCas185(SC); (1977)2SCC424; [1977]2SCR190; 1976(8)LC1017(SC)
A.N. Ray, C.J.1. These four appeals by certificate raise two questions. First, whether tin provisions of Section 108 of the Companies Act, 1956 are manda-tory in regard to transfer of shares. Second, can a. company having been served with notice of attachment of shares register transfer of shares in contravention of the order of attachment.2. The appellant Mannalal Khetan and the respondents Kedar Nath Khetan and Durga Prasad Khetan are members belonging to two branches of the Khetan Family. The respondent Lakshmi Devi Sugar Mills Private Ltd. is a private company. It Was incorporated on 7 April 1934 under the Indian Companies Act, 1913.3. The Khetan family held shares in the res ondent company and in two other companies Maheshwari Khetan Sugar Mills Private Ltd. and Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills Private Ltd. The shares stood in the names of (1) M/s. Ganeslnarayan Onkarmal Khetan, (2) M/s. Sagarmal Hariram Khetan, (3) Sri Mannalal Khetan and (4) Sri Radhakrishna Khetan,4. The members of t...
Tag this Judgment!