Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1707; (1977)0GLR790; (1977)3SCC11; [1977]3SCR569
M.H. Beg, C.J.1. This is a landlord's appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the High Court of Gujarat allowing a revision application of the tenant under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. It appears from the statement of facts in the judgment of the High Court that there was no dispute that the monthly rent of the premises was Rs. 30/- and that the tenant had also to pay the charges for electricity consumed by him. It was, however, at first disputed whether the tenant had to pay house tax and the education cess also. The landlord had brought a suit for arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 990/- from 6-3-67 to 5-12-69 and also to recover a sum of Rs. 27.49 paid as house tax and another sum of Rs. 210.18 paid by the landlord for the electricity consumed by the tenant. On January 5, 1970 the landlord had served a notice upon the tenant terminating the tenancy on the ground that dues ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1174; 1977CriLJ961; (1977)3SCC7; [1977]3SCR521
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court dated June 23, 1971, upholding the conviction of the appellants for offences under Sections 420 and 420/120B of the Penal Code but reducing their sentences. The charge related to cheating the passport issuing authority of the Hooghly district by dishonestly inducing him to issue passports on the basis of false representations. This Court has limited the special leave to the question whether the passports were 'property' within the meaning of Section 420 of the Penal Code?2. Speaking broadly, the allegation against the appellants was that there was a conspiracy between them as a result of which 1480 applications were filed for the issue of passports from July, 1956 to April, 1957, by Muslims and Chinese nationals. These applications were alleged to have been made by suppressing the real facts about the nationality and addresses of the applicants, and by making false representatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1200; 1977CriLJ968; (1977)4SCC598C
P.K. Goswami, J.1. In these appeals by special leave at the instance of the State of Maharashtra the question of the scope of Section 377 (sic) and (2), Cr.P.C. arises for consideration.2. The State preferred appeals against the inadequate sentence awarded by the trial court in each of the three cases tried for offences under Section 33(1)(c), (f) and (h) of the Indian Forest Act. The sentence was a nominal fine of a few rupees in each case.3. The High Court rejected the appeals as incompetent on the ground that the State of Maharashtra was not entitled to prefer the appeals under Section 377(1), Cr.P.C. The High Court held that since the offences were under a Central Act and the investigation or enquiry was conducted only by Forest Officers under the provisions of the Act the Central Government alone was competent to prefer the appeals under Section 377(2), Cr.P.C. However, the High Court also dealt with the merits of the appeals and held that there was no justification for interferin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1977(1)KarLJ441; 1977LabIC839; (1977)3SCC21; [1977]3SCR508
P.S. KAILASAM, J.— 1. This appeal is by the Karnataka Electricity Board by its Secretary by special leave granted by this Court against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent and issuing a writ of mandamus to the appellant to consider the case of the respondent for promotion as an Accounts Superintendent as on December 30, 1966, and to promote him to that post with effect from that date. 2. The respondent was serving as an Accountant, Grade II, in the Electricity Department of the former State of Hyderabad. On the reorganisation of the States in pursuance of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, he was allotted to the new State of Mysore (now Karnataka) with effect from November 1, 1956. The post which he held came to be equated with that of I Division Clerk in the former State of Mysore. On October 1, 1957, the Mysore State Electricity Board, now Karnataka State Electricity Board, was constituted under the Indian Electric...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1566; (1977)3SCC4; [1977]3SCR525
A.C. Gupta, J.1. Ahmedabad Jupiter Spinning Weaving and Manufacturing Company Limited was the owner of 5900 sq. yds. of land forming part of its mill premises at Lower Parel in Bombay which was sought to be acquired by the Maharashtra Government for a municipal school. Notifications under Sections 4 and 6 were issued on June 19, 1961 and May 29, 1964 respectively. The company filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the validity of the notifications on several grounds. A single Judge of the High Court having dismissed the writ petition on August 11, 1969 the company preferred a letters patent appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the management of the company was taken over by the Central Government on October 8, 1972 under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. On September 21, 1974 an Ordinance called the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Ordinance, 1974 was promulgated by virtue of which the textile undertaking of the company the mana...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1177; 1977CriLJ964; (1977)3SCC25; [1977]3SCR513
P.K. Goswami, J.1. The appellant was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate, Udgir, under Section 16(1)(a)(i) proviso (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, read with Section 2(i)(1) and Section 7(i) of the said Act and sentenced to simple imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default rigorous imprisonment for two months; The appellant's father who was also charged for the same offence was, however, acquitted.2. The charge against the appellant was that he sold chilli powder which was adulterated inasmuch as the percentage of the total ash was more than the permissible limit The sample of chilli powder which was seized by the Food Inspector on April 13, 1974, contained 37.25% of the total ash against the permissible percentage of 8%. It was stated in the Analyst's report that the percentage of extraneous matter which was common salt mixed with the chilli powder was 32.4%. The learned Magistrate found that the chilli powder was adulterated...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1182a; [1977]108ITR358(SC); (1977)3SCC432; [1977]3SCR529
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. The short question that arises for determination in this appeal is whether certain commission paid by the assessee to its employees is an allowable expenditure in computing the profits of the assessee from business. The assessee is a registered firm which at all material times consisted of five partners, namely, Chaman Lal, Madan Lal, Harbans Lal, Raj Mohan and Saheb Dayal representing a trust. Chaman Lal was the son of Saheb Dayal and Raj Mohan was the son of one Gurditta Mal. During the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1963-64, Chaman Lal and Harbans Lal had their own independent factories and hence they were not attending to the business of the assessee and Raj Mohan too was not actively associated with the conduct of the business of the assessee as he was working with the Oriental Carpet . (hereinafter referred to as OCM). Thus, from amongst the partners, only Madan Lal was looking after the day-to-day management of the business of the assessee an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1724; (1977)3SCC540; [1977]3SCR538
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. The basic facts giving rise to these appeals being common, the same will be disposed of under one judgment. 2. Notice calling for nominations to be filed before 3 P.M. on 11-3-1974, for filling six vacancies to the Rajya Sabha from the State of Tamil Nadu in the biennial elections was issued on March 4, 1974. Eleven candidates filed their nominations. On scrutiny which was held on March 12, 1974, all those nominations were found to be valid. On 14-3-1974, which was the last date fixed for withdrawal, three candidates withdrew their nominations leaving eight in the field. The poll was held on 21-3-1974. Counting of votes took place on the same date. The result was published according to which, the contesting candidates secured the votes noted against their names as follows:1. Shri Khadar Sha - 3500 2. Shri Khaja Mohideen - 3700 3. Shri V. Subrahmanyan - 300 4. Shri C.D. Natarajan - 3500 5. Shri R. Mohanarangam - Nil 6. Shri S. Ranaganathan - 4100 7. G. Lakshmanan - 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1871; [1977]108ITR627(SC); (1977)3SCC189; [1977]3SCR489
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises a short question of law as to the scope of garnishee proceeding under Section 73. Sub-section (5) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 read with Section 46(5A) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. A brief narration of the facts giving rise to the appeal would be sufficient to explain the background against which the question arises for determination in the appeal.2. One Rai Bhupati Nath Deb Bahadur died on 23rd September, 1959 leaving considerable movable and immovable properties which included inter alia a building situate at No. 13, India Exchange Place, Calcutta. Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 claiming respectively to be the son and daughter of the deceased delivered to the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty an account in form ED-1 of the properties in respect of which, according to them, estate duty was payable on the death of the deceased. The account was filed by respondents Nos. 3 & 4 in their capacity as executors of the Will D/- 20-12-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1259; [1977]108ITR335(SC); (1977)2SCC862; [1977]3SCR475
N.L. Untwalia, J.1. This is an appeal by certificate from the decision of the Madras High Court in a Reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922-hereinafter referred to as the Act. 2. M/s. Carborandum Co. of the United States of America-herein after called the American Company or the Assessee Company, is the appellant. The Central Board of Re venue has declared it a Company under Section 2(5A) of the Act. It has specialized in the manufacture of bonded abrasive and coated abrasive products. For the improvement and advancement in the line of its manufacture, it has a Research Wing also. The results of the research are incorporated in pamphlets prepared from time to time. 3. The Assessee Company enter ed into an agreement dated June 22, 1955 with M/s. Carborandum Universal Ltd.- hereinafter called the Indian company, having its registered office at Madras. As per the terms of the agreement the American Company was to render and did ...
Tag this Judgment!