Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1977)6CTR(SC)79
Jaswant Singh, J. - This batch of appeals by special leave which are directed against three separate judgments of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad dismissing three sets of writ petitions Nos. 1195 to 1198 of 1975, 3931, 3944 and 4929 of 1975 and 6790 of 1974 filed by the appellants to challenge certain orders of the sales tax authorities made in respect of redetermination of their turnover for certain years under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) shall be disposed of by this judgment, as they raise a common question as to whether the excise duty deposited directly in a State treasury or a sub-treasury by the purchasers of the Indian made foreign liquor called Indian liquors before removing the said liquor from a distillery and the countervailing duty remitted directly to a State Treasury or a sub-treasury by the purchasers of the aforesaid specie of liquor before removing it from a bonded warehouse can properly be said to f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1523; [1977]107ITR9(SC); (1977)2SCC519; [1977]2SCR483
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. The fiscal - not the philosophical - implications of Jesus' pragmatic injunction 'Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's'- fall for jural exploration in these appeals. by special leave, the appellant being the Union of India represented by the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal, and the Respondent, Sree Jagannathji and the subject-matter the taxability of the deity Jagannathji by the State under the Income-tax Act, 1922, beyond the admitted point. To appreciate the exigibility issue, we have to flash back to 19th Century Bengal and the then prevailing societal ethos of affluent Hindu piety, and we find ourselves in the spiritual-legal company of Raja Rajendra Mullick, at once holy and wealthy, who, in advancing years, executed a comprehensive will to promote his cherished godly wishes and to provide for his secularly dear cause and near relatives. The construction of this testamentary complex of dispositions and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1336; 1977CriLJ1005; (1977)1SCC666; [1977]2SCR544; 1977(9)LC354(SC)
P.N. BHAGWATI, J.— 1. This appeal by special leave raises a short but interesting question of law. The facts giving rise to the appeal are few and briefly stated as follows: 2. On October 1, 1970 the police filed a charge-sheet against the respondent in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Badami, charging him with having committed an offence punishable under Section 34 of the Mysore Excise Act, 1965. The learned Judicial Magistrate by an order dated October 3, 1970 refused to take cognizance of the offence in this charge-sheet, since it was filed by the Police and not by an Excise official. The view taken by the learned Magistrate was that under Section 60 clause (b) as amended by Mysore Ordinance 4 of 1970 which represented the law as it then stood, it was not competent to him to take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 34, except on the complaint or report of an Excise Officer and since the charge-sheet in the present case was filed by the pol...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1817; 1977CriLJ1453; (1977)4SCC601
A.C. Gupta, J.1. On March 20, 1971 three persons were murdered and three others injured in an incident in village, Chalela in District Patiala. The names of the persons murdered are Bakhtawar Singh, Amar Singh who was Sarpanch of the village, and Gurdev Singh. Those who were injured are Harnek Singh (P.W. 7), Amrik Singh (P.W. 2) and Ujjagar Singh (P.W. 6). Ten persons including the seven appellants before us were arrested in connection with the crime and tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, and convicted as follows:1. Amar Singh Randhawa was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on three counts and was sentenced to death on each count.2. Gurmit Singh accused was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on two counts and was sentenced to death on each count. He was also convicted under Section 302/149 and was sentenced to imprisonment for life. The remaining eight accused were convicted under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code on three count...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC796; 1977CriLJ566; (1977)1SCC816
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. The principal question which arises for determination in this appeal is whether in the facts of the present case the prosecution was justified in invoking the applicability of the presumption contained in Sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. That sub-section provides that in any trial of an offence punishable under Sub-section (2) of Section 5, namely, the offence of criminal misconduct committed by a public servant in the discharge of his duty, the fact that the accused is in possession, for which he cannot satisfactorily account, of pecuniary resources or property disproportionate to his known sources of income may be proved and on such proof, it is presumed unless contrary is proved that the accused is guilty of criminal misconduct in discharge of his official duty and his conviction therefore shall not be invalid by reason only that it is based solely on such presumption. The sub-section consists of two parts. The first part se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1019; (1977)3SCC179; [1977]2SCR511
Jaswant Singh, J.1. This appeal by special leave which is directed against the judgment and decree dated January 29, 1968, of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay involves a question of the applicability or otherwise of the doctrine of frustration embodied in Section 56 of the Contract Act which to use the words of Viscount Maugham in Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Limited v. Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd. 1942 AC 154 'is only a special case of the discharge of contract by an - impossibility of performance arising after the contract was made' or to use the language of Mukherjea, J. in Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugheeram 'Bangur & Co. 1954 SCR 310 'is really an aspect or part of the law of discharge of contract by reason of supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done and hence comes within the purview of Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act.' 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal lie in a short compass and may be briefly stated : The respondents who are th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC831; (1977)2SCC198; [1977]2SCR503; 1977(9)LC79(SC)
H.R. Khanna, J.1. This judgment would dispose of civil appeals No. 1840, 1841 and 1842 of 1971 which have been filed on certificate by the Company Law Board against the common judgment of Delhi High Court in three writ petitions by the respondent-company and its two managing directors to challenge order dated September 27, 1967.2. The respondent company, Upper Doab Sugar Mills Ltd., is a public limited company governed by the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The company has its registered office at Shamli, district Muzaffarnagar (Uttar Pradesh). Its main business is manufacture of sugar from sugar cane. It also manufactures spirits, industrial alcohols and rum from molasses. From 1951 onwards a firm of managing agents managed the respondent company. Two of the partners of that firm were Shri Rajinder Lal and Shri Narinder Lal. The managing agency agreement of that firm was to expire on January 14, 1967. On October 4, 1966 the Board of Director...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC822; (1977)2SCC394; [1977]2SCR533
S. Murtaza Fazl Ali, J.1. Corruption and nepotism is so rampant in our society of today, and more particularly in the services, that the Indian Penal Code was not considered sufficient to meet this menace, and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (Act II of 1947) - hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' - had to be enacted and amended from time to time to stamp out this evil. This is an appeal by special leave directed against the judgment of the Bombay High Court affirming the conviction of the appellant Under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Act and the sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment passed by the Special Judge, Bombay.2. The facts of the present case are more or less undisputed and are the least complicated and, therefore, they fall within a very narrow compass, and by and large we have to examine whether or not the inferences drawn by the High Court from the proved facts are legally correct and lead to only one hypothesis, namely, that the accused is guil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC789; (1977)2SCC88; [1977]2SCR522
Y.V. Chandrachud, J.1. The respondent Radha Krishan who owns house No. 142, Katra Mashru, Delhi let out a portion thereof consisting of five rooms on the ground floor and two rooms on the second floor to one Lal Chand. He filed suit No. 42 of 1958 in the Court of the sub-Judge, Delhi for evicting Lal Chand and four others : Kesho Ram, Jhangi Ram, Nand Lal and Smt. Kakibai, alleging that Lal Chand had sublet the premises to them. The eviction of these persons was ought by the respondent on the grounds that (1) he required the premises for his own use and occupation; (2) he wanted to provide certain essential amenities for himself necessitating re-construction; and (3) that the tenant was in arrears of rent By his judgment dated June 6, 1959 the learned Sub-Judge, First Class, Delhi decreed the suit on the first ground only and rejected the other two contentions. In on appeal filed by the defendants, the learned Senior Sub-Judge, Delhi confirmed the finding of the Trial Court that the ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC720a; [1977(34)FLR72]; [1977]106ITR443(SC); (1977)IILLJ271SC; (1977)1SCC497; [1977]2SCR479; 1977(9)LC57(SC)
P.K. Goswami, J.1. This appeal on certificate is from the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat. The appellants 1 and 2 are respectively the Union of India and the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. Dhrangadhra Chemical Works Kamdar Sangh (hereinafter to be described as the union) is the first respondent. The second respondent is Dhrangadhra Chemical Works (hereinafter to be described as the employer). 2. With respect to the dearness allowance (D.A.) of the workers under the employer there was a reference No. 70/70 before the Industrial Tribunal at Ahmedabad. The parties had arrived at a settlement of the said Industrial dispute and an award was passed in terms of the settlement. According to the award the employer was to Pay D.A. to its employees at the rate of the quarterly average cost of living index as settled by the Simla Bureau, popularly known as 'All India Consumers Price Index' for the relevant quarter. Thus for the months of January, February and March, 1974, the rate of ...
Tag this Judgment!