Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC304; (1978)4SCC214; [1979]1SCR765; 1978(10)LC776(SC)
Fazal Ali, J.1. These appeals have been brought by certificate of fitness granted by the Bombay High Court against the order of the High Court in S.C.A. No. 2149 of 1968 dated 12th March, 1969. By an order dated 12-7-1970 this Court directed the four appeals to be consolidated because the points involved were the same. The appeals have been filed by the Municipal Corporation for the City of Poona (hereinafter called the Corporation) against whom a writ filed before the Bombay High Court was allowed and the orders demanding the octroi duty from the respondents were quashed.2. The facts of the case insofar as they are pertinent to the decision of the points in issue lie within a very narrow compass. The entire case turns upon the interpretation of some of the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act 1949 (hereinafter called the Act) and certain notifications issued thereunder. It appears that under Section 127(1) of the Act the Corporation has got the power to impose...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1188; 1979CriLJ715; (1979)1SCC79
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. This appeal by special leave directed against a judgment, dated September, 15, 1977 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, arises out of these circumstances:On the night intervening January 5 and 6, 1968, two dacoities were committed in the houses of Ramgopal Soni (P.W. 1) and Rampratit Saraf (P.W. 4) at village Nagama, and property consisting of gold and silver ornaments worth more than Rs. 3 lakhs was looted. In this connection 19 persons were arrested by the police. Out of them, 15 were charged with offences under Sections 395/397/109 read with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code.2. The Sessions Judge, Rewa, who fried the case, convicted two of the accused, namely, Jawaharlal and Munnilal under Sections 395 and 397 read with Section 109. Penal Code, and sentenced each of them to four years rigorous imprisonment. He acquitted the remaining 13 accused, including Antar Singh.3. Against the order of their acquittal, the State of Madhya Pradesh carried an appeal to the High...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC80; 1978CriLJ1710; (1979)1SCC161; [1979]1SCR744
Jaswant Singh, J.1. This appeal under Section 2(a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 (Act 28 of 1970) raises a short question as to the nature of the offence made out against the appellant on the basis of the evidence adduced in Sessions Case No. 64 of 1966.2. The Sessions Judge, Udaipur, who tried the appellant found on a consideration of the evidence led in the case including the direct testimony of Mst. Jelki (P.W. 3) and Mst. Modan (P.W. 8) that the appellant attacked his wife, Mst. Gajri with dagger (Exh. 1) and caused injuries on her person out of which injury No. 2 which had injured the liver and caused the perforation of the large colon was sufficient to cause her death in the ordinary course of nature. Despite this finding, the Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and acquitted him of the charge under Section 302 of the Penal Code in view of the fact that Dr. Laxmi Narain (P.W. 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1811; 1979CriLJ1; (1979)1SCC75; [1979]1SCR739; 1978(10)LC758(SC)
Chandrachud, C.J.1. On December 5, 1967, the Baranagore Municipality served a notice on the respondent alleging that he had erected an obstruction over the main municipal drain without the permission of the Administrator of the Municipality and calling upon him to remove the same within fifteen days of the date of receipt of the notice. A similar notice was sent to the respondent by registered post which he received on December 7. On the respondent's failure to comply with the requisition the Municipality, through the appellant who is its Law Assistant, filed a complaint against him under Section 240(1)(b) read with Section 500(1)(b) of the Bengal Municipal Act, XV of 1932, ('The Act'). The respondent took a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the complaint on the ground that since the prosecution was not instituted within six months next after the commission of the offence, it was barred by limitation under Section 533 of the Act. That objection having been rejected by the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1711; 1979CriLJ1322; (1979)1SCC221; 1978(10)LC937(SC)
1. By a judgment dated 19th August, 1971, the Civil and Sessions Judge, Code, convicted the appellants Kailash and Ram Sunder, who are first cousins, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code and sentenced them to imprisonment for life. The charge against the appellants is that at about 1.45 PM on November 3, 1969, they, in pursuance of their common intention, committed the murder of one Mahraji by strangulating her. The order of conviction and sentence having been confirmed by the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) on April 22, 1974, the appellants have filed this appeal by special leave.2. Shri Kohli who appears on behalf of the appellants has left hardly anything unsaid which could, with reason and profit, be said in favour of the appellants. He contends, if we may so compress his arguments, that (1) though it is alleged that the appellants were armed with a Gandasa and a Shujail, admittedly, they did not use those weapons; (2) though quite a few persons had gathere...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1736a; [1978]115ITR153(SC); (1978)4SCC315; [1979]1SCR656; 1978(10)LC782(SC)
Tulzapurkar, J.1. The short question raised in this appeal by special leave is whether Section 8(1) of the Orissa Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1947 suffers from the vice of discrimination and as such is hit by Article 14 of the Constitution 2. The appellant is the Mahant of Emar Math at Puri, which is an ancient public Hindu Religious Trust. The trust owns considerable endowed properties both agricultural and non-agricultural. After the passing of the Orissa Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), the appellant as a trustee has been assessed in the status of an 'individual' under the Act for the assessment years 1948-49 to 1967-68 in respect of the income derived from agricultural lands owned by the trust. It appears that these assessments have been made after granting the exemption under Section 8(1) of the Act which provides that 'any sum derived from land held under such trust and actually spent for the said purposes (charitable or religious purposes) shall...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC248; (1979)1SCC171; [1979]1SCR617
Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. The old question 'what is compensation' is back again. Fortunately, Constitutional Amendments and Judicial precedents have narrowed the scope for controversy. The question has arisen this way :2. The appellant, the Oriental Gas Company Ltd. was originally constituted in England by a deed of settlement in April 1853, as the Oriental Gas Company for the purpose of manufacture, supply distribution and sale of fuel gas in Calcutta. It was later incorporated in accordance with the provisions of the English Joint Stock Companies Act, 1862. By a subsequent arrangement the control and management of the Company passed from British into Indian hands. Over the course of the years the Company acquired extensive properties and became the owner of large plants, machinery, buildings, lands pipelines, stores etc. The total market value of the appellant's industrial undertaking was estimated by the appellant as on 22nd March, 1962, at Rs. 7,00,00,000/-. In 1958, the Government of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC193; 1979LabIC1672; (1979)2SCC34; [1979]1SCR26
Sarkaria, J.1. This judgment will not only dispose of this Appeal (C.A. 2826 of 1977) but also furnish reasons in support of our short order dated August 4, 1978, by which we allowed Civil Appeal No. 278 of 1978.2. Both these Appeals raise a common question with regard to the interpretation, scope and impact of Article 371-D on Articles 226, 229 and 235 of the Constitution.3. In Civil Appeal 2826 of 1977, appellant 1 is the Chief Justice and appellant 2 is the High Court of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Registrar of that Court. Respondent 1, Shri L.V.A. Dikshitulu is a former employee of the High Court whose premature retirement is in question. Respondents 2 and 3 are the Government, and the Accountant General, respectively of Andhra Pradesh.4. Respondent 1 was a permanent employee of the former Hyderabad High Court prior to November 1, 1956. He was confirmed in the post of Chief Superintendent on the establishment of that High Court on October 6, 1956. At the time of his confirmat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1818; (1978)4SCC295; [1979]1SCR735; 1978(10)LC755(SC)
ORDER1. An ad interim order of stay passed by the High Court of Delhi has been challenged before us in this appeal. We should have hesitated to interfere with an interlocutory order following the usual practice in this Court. But, where repercussions are incalculable and the basis of the direction, though interlocutory, is obscure, the ends of justice dominate and we may interfere if public interest so dictates.2. Here is an order of the Company Law Board under Section 408(1) of the Companies Act, 1956, which gives a wealth of facts and a variety of reasons to support an ultimate direction which runs thus :'Since all the three conditions referred to in Sub-section (1) of Section 408 of the Companies Act, 1956, are established on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Company Law Board hereby appoint officers for three years, in addition to the existing directors of the company :-1. Shri B.M. Kaul, Member, Railway Board (Retd.) 5-J-4 Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.2. Shri A.K. Mazumdar, Ch...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC154; (1979)2SCC8; [1979]1SCR664
Fazal Ali, J.1. This election appeal is directed against the order of the High Court of Kerala dated 19th December, 1977 by which the election of the appellant Haji C.H. Mohammad Koya has been set aside and he has been disqualified from taking part in the elections for a period of six years under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter called the Act).2. For the purpose of brevity we shall refer to the respondent-petitioner as the Petitioner and Haji C.H. Mohammad Koya as the appellant.3. In the general election held to the Legislative Assembly of Kerala on 20th March, 1977 the petitioner and the appellant were the contesting candidates from No. 34 Malappuram Constituency. The counting of votes took place on the 20th March, 1977 and the appellant was declared elected on the same date. The total votes polled were 56.276. The appellant secured 39,362 votes and thus defeated the petitioner by a margin of 20,000 votes. Aggrieved by the election results, th...
Tag this Judgment!