Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC803; 1978LabIC612; (1978)ILLJ406SC; (1978)2SCC50; [1978]3SCR334
ORDER44. We agree with the conclusion of Brother Bhagwati but prefer to rest our decision on the ground that the impugned Act violates the provisions of Article 31(2) and is, therefore, void. We consider it unnecessary to express any opinion on the effect of the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in W.P. No. 371 of 1976....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1233; (1978)3SCC526
S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.1. This appeal try Special Leave is directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant Achhey Lal under Sections 302/149, 325/149 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code. The detailed narration of the prosecution case is contained in the judgments of the Courts below and it is not necessary for us to repeat the same all over again particularly when, in our opinion, this appeal must succeed on a short point. According to the prosecution as many as 15 named persons had taken part in the assault on the deceased. Of these 15 persons, 14 have been acquitted by the High Court, but the appeal of Achhey Lal was dismissed and conviction and sentences awarded by the Sessions Judge were upheld. Mr. Goel, appearing for the appellant, submitted that in view of the acquittal by the High Court of 14 named persons, the charge under Section 149 I.P.C. must fail because there could not be an unlawful assembly where the number of persons p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Arizona v. Washington - 434 U.S. 497 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court Arizona v. Washington, 434 U.S. 497 (1978) Arizona v. Washington No. 76-1168 Argued October 31, 1977 Decided February 21, 1978 434 U.S. 497 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus After respondent was found guilty of murder, the Arizona trial court granted a new trial because the prosecution had withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense. At the beginning of the new trial, the trial judge, after extended argument, granted the prosecutor's motion for a mistrial predicated on improper and prejudicial comment during defense counsel's opening statement that evidence had been hidden from respondent at the first trial, but the judge did not expressly find that there was "manifest necessity" for a mistrial or expressly state that he had considered alternative solutions. The Arizona Supreme Court refused to review the mistrial ruling, and respondent sought a writ of habeas cor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1978)3SCC339; [1978]3SCR162
ORDER1. The matter before us arises out of a publication in the Indian Express newspapers dated 13th December, 1977. Some people perhaps believe that attempts to hold trials of everything and everybody by publications in newspapers must include those directed against the highest Court of Justice in this country and its pronouncements. If this is done in a reasonable manner, which pre-supposes accuracy of information about a matter on which any criticism is offered, and arguments are directed fairly against any reasoning adopted, I would, speaking for myself, be the last person to consider it objectionable even if some criticism offered is erroneous. In Bennett Coleman & Co. and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. : [1973]2SCR757 :John Stuart Mill, in his essay on 'Liberty', pointed out the need for allowing even erroneous opinions to be expressed on the ground that the correct ones become more firmly established by what may be called the 'dialectical' process of a struggle with wrong ones ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1296; 1978CriLJ1281a; (1978)3SCC459; [1978]3SCR293
ORDERNew Delhi, the 30th September, 1977. S. O. WHEREAS the Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary and expedient so to do for securing equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, of mustard oil; NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955), the Central Government hereby makes the following orders namely; 1. Short title, extent and commencement. --(1) This order may be called the Mustard Oil (Price Control) Order, 1977.(2) It extends to the whole of India.(3) It shall come into force at once.2. Definition:--In this Order, 'dealer' means a person engaged in the business of the purchase, sale or storage for sale of mustard oil.3. Price at which a dealer may sell. No dealer shall, either by himself or by any person on his behalf, sell or offer to sell any mustard oil at a retail price exceeding Rupees 10/- per kilogram, exclusive of the cost of container but inclusive of taxes.Sd/- (T. Balakr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United States Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Comm'n - 434 U.S. 452 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court United States Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Comm'n, 434 U.S. 452 (1978) United States Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission No. 76-635 Argued October 11, 1977 Decided February 21, 1978 434 U.S. 452 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus The Multistate Tax Compact was entered into by a number of States for the stated purposes of (1) facilitating proper determination of state and local tax liability of multistate taxpayers; (2) promoting uniformity and compatibility in state tax systems; (3) facilitating taxpayer convenience and compliance in the filing of tax returns and in other phases of tax administration; and (4) avoiding duplicative taxation. To these ends, the Compact created the appellee Multistate Tax Commission. Each member State is authorized to request that the Commission perform an audit on its behalf, and the Commiss...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC945; (1978)2SCC552; [1978]3SCR190; [1978]41STC394(SC); 1978(10)LC212(SC)
1. The question before us in these appeals by special leave was framed as follows :Whether 'Atukulu' (parched rice), and 'Muramuralu (puffed rice) are 'rice' within the meaning of Entry 66(b) of Schedule I to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. 19572. This question arose before the Andhra Pradesh High Court in appeals from single Judge decisions of the High Court, out of provisions of Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. Section 5(1) of the Act provides :5. Levy of Tax on Sales or Purchases of Goods : (1) Every dealer (other than a casual trader and an agent of a non-resident dealer) whose total turnover for a year is not less than Rs. 25,000 and every agent of a non-resident dealer whatever be his turnover for the year, shall pay a tax for each year, at the rate of four paise on every rupee of his turnover.4. Section 5(2) enacts :Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1) the tax under this Act shall be levied -(a) in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1978)7CTR(SC)0044B
Beg, C.J. - The question before us in these appeals by special leave was framed as follows -'Whether atukulu (parched rice) and muramaralu (puffed rice) within the meaning of entry 66(b) of Schedule I to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 ?'2. This question arose before the Andhra Pradesh High Court in appeals from single Judge decisions of the High Court, out of provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').S. 5(1) of the Act provides -3. '5. Levy of tax on sales on purchases of goods. - (1) Every dealer (other than a casual trader and an agent of a non-resident dealer) whose total turnover for a year is not less than Rs. 25,000 and every agent of a non-resident dealer whatever be his turnover for the year, shall pay a tax for each year at the rate of four paise on every rupee of his turnover.'4. S. 5(2) enacts :'Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-S. (1), the tax under this Act shall be levied -(a) in the case of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. Rice - 434 U.S. 429 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. Rice, 434 U.S. 429 (1978) Raymond Motor Transportation, Inc. v. Rice No. 76-558 Argued November 8-9, 1977 Decided February 21, 1978 434 U.S. 429 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN Syllabus Wisconsin statutes, as a general rule, do not allow trucks longer than 55 feet or pulling more than one other vehicle to be operated on highways within that State without a permit. Implementing regulations set forth the conditions under which "trailer train" and other classes of permits will be issued, and contain a great number of exceptions to the general rule. Appellant motor carriers were denied permits to operate 65-foot double trailer units on certain interstate highways in Wisconsin on the ground that their proposed operations were not within the narrow scope of the regulations specifying when "trailer train" permi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC548; [1978(36)FLR266]; (1978)ILLJ349SC; (1978)IILLJ73SC; (1978)2SCC213; [1978]3SCR207; 1978LabIC467(SC)
ORDER165. We are in respectful agreement with the view expressed by Krishna Iyer, J. in his critical judgment that the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board appeal should be dismissed. We will give our reasons later indicating the area of concurrence and divergence, if any, on the various points in controversy on which our learned Brother has dwelt.Chandrachud, C. J.166. By a short order dated February 21, 1978, which I pronounced on behalf of myself and my learned Brethren Jaswant Singh and Tulzapurkar, I had expressed our agreement with the view taken by Brother Krishna Iyer on behalf of himself and three other learned Brethren that the Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board's appeal be dismissed. I had stated that the area of concurrence or divergence with the rest of the judgment will, if necessary, be indicated later.167. I have now the added advantage of knowing the divergent view expressed by Jaswant Singh and Tulzapurkar, JJ. on certain aspects of the matter. Almost every ...
Tag this Judgment!