Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1416; (1981)3SCC576
O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. Shri Kalyanasundaram, Editor of Janashakthi (a Tamil journal) and Secretary of the Communist Party of Tamil Nadu, who was 'severely warned' by the High Court of Madras for alleged 'indirect Civil contempt' is the appellant in this appeal under Section 19(1)(b) on the Contempt of Courts Act. 1971. The respondent who, at that time, was the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu filed a suit, C.S. No. 17 of 1973. in the High Court of Madras claiming a sum of Rs. Ten lakhs as damages for certain alleged defamatory publications made by the appellant in a Tamil journal 'Kumudham'. The suit was instituted on January 5, 1973. The institution of the suit was given out as a news item on January 5, 1973 and January 6, 1973 in almost all newspapers at Madras. On January 14, 1973 the appellant published in Janashakthi of which he was the Editor the same news item about the institution of the suit along with a cartoon. There were exclamation marks wherever the figure Rs. ten lakhs occ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1524; [1981]130ITR14(SC); 1981(1)SCALE745; (1981)3SCC152; 1981(13)LC436(SC)
1. These appeals by special leave are directed against the orders of the High Court of Bombay declining to call for a statement of the case on the questions proposed by the appellant.2. The respondent manufactures Nylon -6 yarn from caprolactum imported from Germany. It appears that crude naphtha left over after the extraction of petrol and other oil from crude oil yields benzene, which in turn gives cyclo-hexane, and on further processing that leads to caprolactum. When caprolactum is subjected to heat upto 270 degrees Nylon -6 results therefrom in the form of yarn. The chemical composition of caprolactum remains the same when it is converted into nylon fibre. When the nylon fibre is subjected to further heating the process is reversed and the nylon fibre is reconverted into caprolactum.3. For the assessment year 1965-66 the respondent claimed rebate of surtax under the first proviso to paragraph one of the Third Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 on the ground that ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1547; (1981)24CTR(SC)357; [1981]130ITR23(SC); 1981(1)SCALE727; (1981)3SCC154; 1981(13)LC469(SC)
R.S. Pathak, J. 1. The delay in filing the special leave petition is condoned. Having regard to the questions raised by the special leave petition, special leave to appeal is granted.2. The appellant is a limited company engaged in the manufacture of Nylon-6 yarn from imported caprolactum. In assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1968-69, the appellant claimed that Nylon-6 was an article covered by item 18 of the Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the Act and, therefore, it was entitled to development rebate at 35% under Section 33(1)(b)(B)(i)(a) and for deduction, in terms of Section 80-I, from the profits and gains attributable to a priority industry. The appellant claimed that Nylon-6 fell within the scope of the entry:Petrochemicals including corresponding products manufactured from other basic raw materials like calcium carbide, ethyl alcohol or hydro-carbons from other sources.The claim was allowed by the Income Tax Officer. When completing the a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1415; 1981CriLJ1016; 1981(1)SCALE811; 1981(Supp)SCC83
1. In connection with the murder of two persons, Ram Pyare Singh and Awadh Bihari Singh and injuries caused to some others, twenty-one persons were tried by the learned Sessions Judge of Basti for offences under Sections 147, 149 read with 302 etc. etc. Nine out of the twentyone accused persons were convicted on various counts while the remaining accused including the present appellants were acquitted. The nine convicted accused preferred an appeal to the High Court while one Ram Sumer Singh (First informant in the case) filed a criminal revision case against the acquitted accused. The High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the convicted accused though the sentence of death passed on four of them was altered to imprisonment for life. The Criminal Revision case filed by Ram Sumer Singh was allowed and, having regard to the limitations of revisional powers, the acquittal of the appellants was set aside and a retrial was ordered. The appellants have appealed to this Court against th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC1711; 1981MPLJ610(SC); 1981(1)SCALE714; (1981)3SCC103; [1981]3SCR605; 1981(13)LC477(SC)
1. A tenant under a decree of eviction is the appellant in this appeal by special leave.2. Respondent landlord filed a suit for recovery of possession of premises being a small shop admeasuring 7'x22' forming part of a big non-residential building situated in Sadar Bazar, Bilaspur town in Madhya Pradesh on two grounds, to wit : (i) that he (landlord) intended to open a medicine shop and he had no other reasonably suitable accommodation for the same in the town; and (ii) that he (landlord) required the suit building for the purpose of reconstruction and repairs which could not be carried out unless it was vacated by the defendant. The tenant resisted the suit pointing out that the landlord on his own admission as set out in plaint para 4 was in possession of a major portion of a non-residential building of which he acquired possession from the firm of Goraldas Parmanand which accommodation was sufficient for starting the business of Chemists and Druggists shop. It was also contended tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC478
P.N. BHAGWATI, J.1. We are of the view that having regard to the fact that the appellant did not intend to cause injury to the complainant in any vital part of the body and also having regard to the fact that his only son is in mental hospital, the sentence imposed on the appellant should be reduced. Hence we allow the appeal on the question of sentence and reduce the sentence from five years3 rigorous imprisonment to three years' rigorous imprisonment....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC389
ORDER 1. It will meet the ends of justice if we dispose of the writ petition as under which we do after hearing counsel on either side. 2. As soon as petitioners are arrested, we direct that they be forthwith produced before the appropriate Magistrate and be released on bail in the sum of Rs 2000 with two sureties each in the like amount. In view of this it is not necessary to decide the question of constitutionality raised in the petition. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC388
R.S. PATHAK, J.— 1. Special leave granted. 2. It is clear that the Order dated April 2, 1980 made by the Calcutta High Court can operate in respect of those proceedings only which are taken within the jurisdiction of that court. The order is clarified accordingly....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC388a
R.B. Mishra and; S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, JJ.1. After hearing counsel for the parties, we find that it was not a case under Section 307, IPC at all. We, therefore, convert the conviction of appellant Ram Shanker from one under Section 307, IPC to that under Sections 325/34, IPC. An application has been made by both the parties that the offence may be compounded. In the circumstances, therefore, so far as the offence under Sections 325/34, IPC is concerned, we sanction the compounding of the offence as the parties have settled their differences and acquit Ram Shanker of the charges framed against him. The offence under Section 323, IPC is compoundable without permission of the Court, and as Sheo Shanker and Nand Kumar have compounded the offence, they are acquitted of the charges framed against them....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC387
Order 1. We have heard Mr Attorney-General for the petitioner and Mr B.C. Ghose for the respondents. 2. In view of the points made in the transfer petition and in view of the fact that Civil Appeal No. 2889 of 1980 pending in this Court in the case of Kamakhya Narain Singh raises certain questions which would have an impact on the decision of CWJCs Nos. 802 and 805 of 1980 pending in the High Court of Patna, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi and in order to avoid any conflict of decisions in these cases, we direct that CWJCs Nos. 802 and 805 of 1980 pending in the High Court of Patna, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi, be withdrawn and stand transferred to this Court and be heard along with CA No. 2889 of 1980 pending in this Court. The connected petitions for amendment of Writ Petitions Nos. 802 and 805 of 1980 shall also stand transferred to this Court for disposal. 3. There shall be no order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!