Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1980)4SCC109; 1980(12)LC673(SC)
O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. The Civil Appeal, the Special Leaves Petitions and the Writ Petitions were heard together. There were some points common to all the cases and some special only to a few of the cases. It is unnecessary to state the facia of any of the cases in detail. Before the pissing of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act 1965, the Cooperative Societies Act 1965, the Cooperative Societies Act 1912 was in force and various Cooperative Societies including Cooperative Banks were registered under that Act. In 1965 the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act 1965 was passed to consolidate as and amend She Jaw relating to Cooperative Societies, in Utter Pradesh. The statement of objects and reasons shows that the effort was to reorient the policy of the State towards cooperation and to adopt cooperative techniques in various spheres of development activity. Experience had shown that it was also necessary to introduce some provisions to entrust additional function and responsibilities to Coop...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC182
N.L. Untwalia,; P.N. Shinghal and; V.D. Tulzapurkar, JJ.1. In this case certificate proceedings were started against the appellant for recovery of a large amount of mortgage loan and interest. Mr S.K. Sinha, appearing for the appellant informs us that a major portion of the amount lias been recovered or paid. Only a small portion remains to be paid now. He, therefore, prayed for a year's time to pay the balance due. Mr B.P. Singh appearing for the respondent State states that he is not in a position to say as to what exactly is the amount due from the appellant now but he has no objection if the appellant undertakes to pay the balance within such time as the court thinks reasonable to grant. On the facts and in the circumstances of this case we direct that the balance of the amount would be quantified either by agreement of the parties within three months from today or by the Certificate Officer within three months thereafter. The appellant must pay the entire balance due, together wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1981]130ITR184(SC)
1. This appeal by special leave is covered by the judgment of this Court in CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce : [1965]55ITR722(SC) and in Addl. CIT v. Swat Article Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association : [1980]121ITR1(SC) . It is clear from the judgment in CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce, that the objects of the Andhra Chamber of Commerce fell within the last head of charitable purpose denoted by the words 'advancement of any other object of general public utility' and were, therefore, charitable within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the I.T. Act, 1961, unless it could be shown that they involved the carrying on of any activity for profit. The words 'not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit' came up for consideration before this Court in Addl. CIT v. Surat Article Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association, and there it was held by the majority of the judges that it was only where the predominant object and the purpose of the activity carried on was to earn profit, that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1510; 1980CriLJ1084; (1980)3SCC435; [1980]3SCR982
O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. A cocktail of law and politics, reason and extravagance is the only way we can describe the submissions made to us in these two cases. Well known personalities are involved, in one case an Ex-Central Minister, the present Governor of a State and some leading journalists, and in the other an ex-Central Minister, and a host of Government officials. Perhaps that was responsible for the passion and the tension which appeared to characterise and sometimes mar the arguments in the two cases. 2. We will first take up for consideration Criminal Appeal No. 287 of 1979.3. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 196(1)(a) of the CrPC 1973, and Section 7 of the Explosive Substances Acticle, 1908, the Government of India by its order dated September 6, 1976 accorded sanction for the prosecution of George Mathew Fernandes alias George Fernandes and 24 others for alleged offences Under Sections 121-A Indian Penal Code, 120-B Indian Penal Code read with Sections 4, 5 an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1575; (1980)4SCC81; [1980]3SCR973; 1980(12)LC619(SC)
ORDERV.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. These petitions for special leave deserve to be dismissed because the Full Bench judgment of the Allahabad High Court which is challenged in all the three has been rightly decided in our view. Even so, a speaking order has become necessary because, as rightly pointed out by counsel, the earlier decision of this Court in Vishesh Kumar v. Shanti Prasad : [1980]3SCR32 does not specifically cover the precise point that has been raised before us by counsel for the petitioner. We are concerned with the ambit and impact of Section 3 of the CPC (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1978 (for short, the Act), which forbids a revision Under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code (acronymically, the C.P.C) to the High Court from a judgment or order in appeal by the District Court where the suit out of which the case arises is not one of the value of Rs. 20,000/- and above.2. We have, in Vishesh Kumar v. Shanti Prasad (supra) considered the scheme, setting and purpose of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1454; 1980LabIC742; (1980)IILLJ124SC; (1980)3SCC406; [1980]3SCR966; 1980(1)SLJ619(SC)
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. These two appeals, turning on the validity of the retrenchment of 23 workmen way back in 1966, are amenable to common disposal. Mr. Phadke, appearing for the Management, argued straight to the point; so did Shri Mridul, with the result that we could get the hang of the case without much wrestling with time or getting paper-logged. Since, in substance, we are inclined to leave undisturbed the Award of the Industrial Tribunal, affirmed, as it were, by the High Court, both these appeals will be given short shrift with brief reasons.2. The facts, to the extent necessary to appreciate the issues canvassed, are brief. The Management of a tea plantation by name Jorehaut Tea Co., Ltd., retrenched 23 workmen, 16 of whom were paid retrenchment compensation allegedly in, terms of Section 25F of the Industrial. Disputes Act (for short, the Act) and in the order of 'last come, first go' while the services of the other seven were terminated, although, on payment of retrenchme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1612; (1980)4SCC211; [1980]3SCR946
N.L. Untwalia, J.1. These three appeals by the Bar Council of Delhi and the Bar Council of India are from the common judgment of the Delhi High Court allowing three writ petitions filed by the first respondent in each appeal and others seeking the setting aside of the election of the Bar Council of Delhi held in the year 1978. As the points involved in them are identical they are all being disposed of by this common judgment. We shall proceed to state the facts from the records of Civil Appeal No. 2224 of 1979 in which respondent No. 1 is Shri Surjeet Singh Bhangul. He was a voter as also a candidate for the election wherein he lost. In the writ petition giving rise to Civil Appeal 2225 of 1979 there were three petitioners-two were candidates but Shri D. R. Thakur was an advocate whose name was not included in the electoral roll although his name occurs in the State roll of Advocates. Shri A.S. Randhawa, respondent No. 1 in Civil Appeal 2226of 1979 was a person whose name occurred both...
Tag this Judgment!