Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC364
P.N. Bhagawati, J.1. This special leave petition is directed against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court confirming an order of eviction passed against the petitioner. I do not see any reason to interfere with the order passed by the High Court, but there is one point to which I must refer, and that arises out of a decision of the Calcutta High Court in Daya Debi v. Chapala Debi1. That decision has taken the view that when a claim for arrears of rent is assigned by A to B, it loses the character of a claim for rent as soon as it is assigned and it becomes merely an actionable claim. This view is, of course, not shared by most of the other High Courts and even the Calcutta High Court itself in other decisions has not accepted this view. It does appear to me that this view is not correct because it is difficult to see how a claim for arrears of rent ceases to be such when it is assigned by the owner when he transfers his properties to another. So far as the tenant is concerned,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1361; (1977)3SCC592; [1978]1SCR1
M.H. Beg, C.J.1. Original Suits Nos. 1 to 6 of 1977, before us have been filed on behalf of the States of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh and Orissa against the India under Article 131 of the Constitution of India. There are (sic) before us three writ Petitions, Nos. 67 to 69 of 1977, by three members of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Punjab against Union of India and Shri Charan Singh, the Home Minister in the Government of India and Shri Zail Singh, Chief Minister of Punjab. (sic) six suits and the three Writ Petitions raise certain common quesis(sic) of law and fact. They were, therefore, permitted to be argued (sic). We have already dismissed the suits and petitions after ring them at length and now; propose to state our reasons for doing as stated in our order of 29th April 1977. Before dealing with questions of fact and law I will indicate the nature of the reliefs; (sic) by each plaintiff under Article 131 and the grievance of each (sic)tione...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC2034; (1977)3SCC448; [1978]1SCR136; 1977(9)LC394(SC)
P.N. Bhagawati, J.1. These appeals by certificate are directed against a judgment of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court striking down Section 78-B to Section 78-G of the Calcutta Improvement Act, 1911 as invalid on the ground of excessive delegation of legislative power as also contravention of Article 14 of the Constitution and declaring Rules 11 to 21 of the rules framed by the Government under Sub-section (3a) of Section 137 as ultra vires the provisions of the Act. The facts giving rise to the appeals lie in a very narrow compass and may be briefly stated as follows.2. The respondents in Civil Appeal No. 579 of 1976 are the owners of a building bearing No. 35 situate at Lower Circular Road, Calcutta while the respondents in Civil Appeal No. 580 of 1976 are owners of a building bearing No. 1/A situate in Mcleod Street, Calcutta. There was a street known as Fire Lane connecting the Lower Circular Road on the east to Mcleod Street on the West. In or about November 1954 the Bo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1926; 1977CriLJ1557; (1977)3SCC287; [1978]1SCR153
V.K. Krishna Iyer, J.1. Some basic issues bearing on prescription of punishments arise for judicial investigation in this criminal appeal where leave has been limited to tailoring the sentence by appellate review to fit the gravity of the delinquency and the redemption of the deviant.2. The facts leading up to the conviction may need brief narration. The appellant, along with another accused, deceived several desperate unemployed young men, received various sums of Rs. 1200/- by false pretences that they would secure jobs for them through politically influential friends and other make-believe representations. The offence of cheating under Section 420 IPC was made out and conviction of both the accused followed. The 1st accused (appellant be-fore us) is a young man around 28 years old and works as a Junior Assistant in the Planning and Financial Department of the Andhra Pradesh Secretariat and the other accused is his friend who personated as a State Port Officer. Before the trial court...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1936a; 1977CriLJ1566a; (1977)3SCC268; [1978]1SCR125a
P.K. Goswami, J1. There are cases where crimes are established but criminals' participation is shrouded in suspicion. This is one such case.2. Three murders were committed in the course of a dacoity during the early part of the night on April 20, 1972, at about 9.00 P.M. All the inmates of the house under attack had not then finished their meals. Lights were burning. The village was awake. Accused are known and of the neighborhood combining with four unknown persons. They came armed with firearms. The fire was opened and two men and one woman fell to the fatal bullets.3. Shrieks and shouts came from the house as well as from the house-top where insiders took position, torchlight with one of them, shouting frantically for help. A large number of men gathered at the gate, some of them even while dacoity was going on inside. A fire was lit at the gate to add to the moonlight to enable recognition of the dacoits.4. What does it all lead to? Only three inmates, PWs 1 to 3, an inimical neigh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1980; (1977)3SCC425; [1978]1SCR145; 1977(1)SLJ478(SC); 1977(9)LC401(SC)
Jaswant Singh, J.1. This appeal by Special leave is directed against an order dated July 5, 1971, of the High Court of Mysore at Bangalore dismissing in limine writ petition No. 1662 of 1971 seeking issuance of a writ quashing order No. P.W.D./EBS 70 dated March 31, 1971, passed by the first respondent herein directing that January 28, 1904, be accepted as the correct date of birth of the appellant and the period from January 28, 1959 (the date of his attaining superannuation) to March 31, 1959 (when he actually handed over charge of his office) be treated as extension of service.2. Briefly stated the facts leading o the appeal are: The appellant joined service as a Senior Operator in the Department of Electricity of the State of Mysore on November 23, 1945. Though in the registers of the school and other educational institutions in which the appellant had studied, his date of birth had been recorded as January 28, 1904, he gave March 13, 1912 (AD) as the date of his birth at the time ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC2041; (1977)4SCC130; 1977(9)LC431(SC)
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This is a group of applications made by the petitioners in various writ petitions for directions regarding discharge of batik guarantees given by them pursuant to interim orders made by this Court in the writ petitions. The writ petitions were filed by the petitioners in this Court challenging the validity of the Levy Sugar Supply Control Order, 1972 made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 fixing the price of levy sugar in different zones in the country, on the principal ground that the price so fixed was not in accordance with the principles laid down in Section 3, Sub-section (3C) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. When the writ petitions were admitted, an application was made by the petitioners in each writ petition for stay of the operation of the Levy Sugar Supply Control Order 1972 and this Court made an interim order on each of the applications staying the operation of the Levy Sugar Supply Control Order, 1972, on the petitioners in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1977(9)LC601(SC)
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. A death sentence, with all its dreadful scenario of swinging desperately out of the last breath of mortal life, is an excruciating hour for the judges called upon to lend signature to this macabre stroke of the executioner's rope. Even so, judges must enforce the laws, whatever they be, and decide according to the best of their lights; but the laws, are not always just, and the lights are not always luminous. Nor, again, are judicial methods always adequate to secure justice. We are bound by the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code, by the very oath of our office. 2. Section 354(3) of the new Code gives the convicting judge, on a murder charge, a discretion to choose between capital sentence and life term. It is true that in the present Code, the unmistakable shift in legislative emphasis is on life imprisonment for murder as the rule and capital sentence an exception, to be resorted to for reasons to be stated Ediga Annamma v. State of A.P. : 1974CriLJ683...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC2051; 1977LabIC1367; (1977)3SCC399; [1977]3SCR775; 1977(1)SLJ457(SC)
Y.V. Chandrachud, J.1. This is a group of five appeals, one from Maharashtra and four from Gujarat. They involve substantially identical questions and since the appeal from the judgment of the Bombay High Court was argued as the main appeal, we will refer to the facts of that appeal and indicate at appropriate places if there is any material difference between those facts and the facts leading to the Gujarat appeals. Civil Appeal No. 1113 of 1974 from Maharashtra is by certificate granted by the High Court of Bombay Under Article 133(1)(a) & (b) of the Constitution. Civil Appeals Nos. 242 and 285-287 of 1974 from Gujarat are also by certificate granted by the Gujarat High Court Under Article 133(1) of the Constitution.2. Special Civil Application No. 815 of 1972 which has given rise to Civil Appeal No. 1113 of 1974 was disposed of by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court by its judgment dated 15th, 16th and 17th January, 1974. The four Gujarat appeals arise out of Special Civil App...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1768; 1977CriLJ1160; (1977)3SCC221; 1977(9)LC384(SC)
A.C. Gupta, J. 1. These are two appeals by special leave, one is by eight acc, used persons against the order of conviction and sentences passed, in respect of seven of them on charges under Sections 323 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 162(2) of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, and as regards one of them under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code; the other appeal is by the State of Gujarat against the acquittal of the seven accused in respect of the charge under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and the acquittal of the eighth accused of the charge under Section 302. The judgment of the High Court appealed from also disposed of two appeals from the judgment of Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Nerol, one by the accused against their conviction and the other by the State against their acquittal in respect of some of the charges. It appears that in village Lambha in Ahmedabad District, a dispute had been going on between the agriculturists and the shephards; the...
Tag this Judgment!