Privy Council Cases
Colonial & appellate judgments
Browse Privy Council & House of Lords decisions
Search appeals from Indian High Courts decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and related appellate benches - foundational authority for constitutional and commercial law.
Colonial & appellate
Latest Privy Council judgments
Sudhindra Nath Dutt Vs. the King
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal422
Lahiri, J.1. Messrs. Harold F. Ritchie and Co. Ltd. are a reputed business concern carrying on business at 11 Olive Street, Calcutta. Amongst other things they are importers & distributors of Eno's Fruit Salt, Germolene and Brylcream. It is said that on 14-5-1948, they received an order from Messrs. Section N. Siddique & Sons of 2 Waterworks Road - Dacca for the supply of 100 cases of Eno's Fruit Salt, 50 cases of Germolene and 50 cases of Brylcream by a letter which has been marked as Ex. 1 in the case. On the same day at about 4.30 p.m. a man named A. Rahaman representing himself to be an agent of Messrs. S. N. Siddique & Sons of Dacca came to see the Manager of Messrs. Harold F. Ritchie & Co. Ltd., Mr. Maurice D. Sopher in connection with the order for sale; but as it was late in the afternoon & the office hour was over he was asked by the Manager to come on the following morning which was a Saturday. Next morning Rahaman again came at 9 O'clock but had to wait at the outer office f...
Tag this Judgment!Ezra Proprietary Estates Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1951Cal326,[1950]18ITR762(Cal)
Harries, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 66 (1), Income-tax Act, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, to this Court in respect of an assessment of the applicant company for the assessment years 1939-40 and 1940-41. The question which has been submitted to the Court for answer is as follows : 'Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, the provisions of Section 23A were properly invoked ?'2. The assessee is a private limited company whose main source of income is income from property assessable under Section 9, Income-tax Act. Its only other source of income is interest on deposits, but such income is only slightly over 1 per cent, of the assessable income.3. The relevant accounting years for the two assessments were the calendar years 1938 and 1939. According to the assessee the company made a profit of Rs. 30,000 in 1938 and Rs. 15,000 in 1939 and the whole of the profit for these two years was distributed amongst the share-holders as dividends.4...
Tag this Judgment!Udhavji Anandji Ladha and ors. Vs. Bapudas Ramdas Darbar
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom94
Chagla, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decree passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Belgaum, in a partnership action, and the facts leading up to this litigation may be briefly stated.2. A partnership was started between the plaintiff's father and defendant 1 in 1904 and the plaintiff's father died on 30th April 1927. The plaintiff filed the suit from which this appeal arises for dissolution of partnership and for accounts alleging that even after the death of his father the partnership continued. On 23rd August 1935, the plaintiff applied for amending the plaint for alleging an alternative cause of action, and the alternative cause of action was that in the event of its being held that there was no subsisting partnership after the death of the plaintiff's father, accounts should be taken on the footing that the partnership stood dissolved on the death of the plaintiff's father. That application was rejected by the trial Court, and the trial Court holding that there was no...
Tag this Judgment!M. ZiauddIn Ahmad and ors. Vs. Jagmohan Ram
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All670
P.L. Bhargava, J.1. This appeal has been filed by Munshi Ziauddin and others, who were plaintiffs-in a suit instituted by them, in the Court of the Munsif of Mohammadabad Gohna at Azamgarh, against Jagmohan Ram, the defendant-respondent for obtaining (1) a perpetual injunction directing the defendant to demolish certain enclosures and walls, constructed by him on sub-plots Nos. 12 and 13, which form part of the abadi plot No. 440 in village Baragaon, in the district of Azamgarh, and to have no concern with a garhi in plot No. 887 of the same village; and (2) a decree for possession over the plots aforesaid. Admittedly, the parties are co-sharers in village Baragaon, and there has been a perfect partition in the village and the abadi plot No. 440 has also been partitioned, as a result of which different portions of it have been allotted to different mahals and khewats. 2. The plaintiffs claimed to be the owners of sub-plot No. 12. This claim was contested; but it is no longer disputed t...
Tag this Judgment!Shaikh Ali Ahmed Vs. the Collector of Bombay
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1949)51BOMLR589
Chainani, J.1. This is an application under Section 491, Criminal Procedure Code, for directions of the nature of habeas corpus. The applicant was carrying on business in Bombay in the name of Interseas Corporation as the sole proprietor thereof. In 1946 he also promoted a private limited company under the name of Allied Agencies Ltd. and became a director thereof. He was assessed to income-tax, super-tax and surcharge, including penalties, at Rs. 10, 17, 259-3-0 for the year 1943-44. A notice calling upon him to pay this amount was issued by the Income-tax authorities. He, however, did not pay it. The Income-tax authorities, therefore, wrote to the Collector of Bombay and asked him to recover the amount in the manner provided in Section 46 of the Indian Income-tax Act. Sub-section (2) of this section empowers the Collector to recover the amount as if it was an arrear of land-revenue, or as if a decree for that amount had been passed by a civil Court. On May 17, 1948, the Collector att...
Tag this Judgment!Ali Ahmed Vs. the Collector of Bombay
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom33
Chainani, J.1. This is an application under Section 491, Criminal P. C., for directions of the nature of habeas corpus. The applicant was carrying on business in Bombay in the name of Interseas Corporation as the sole proprietor thereof. In 1946 he also promoted a private limited company under the name of Allied Agencies Ltd., and became a director thereof. He was assessed to income-tax, super-tax and surcharge, including penalties, at Rs. 10,17,259-3-0 for the year 1943-44. A notice calling upon him to pay this amount was issued by the Income-tax authorities. He, however, did not pay it. The Income-tax authorities, therefore, wrote to the Collector of Bombay and asked him to recover the amount in the manner provided in Section 46, Income-tax Act. Sub-section (2) of this section empowers the Collector to recover the amount as if it was an arrear of land revenue, or as if a decree for that amount had been passed by a civil Court. On 17th May 1948, the Collector attached two bank account...
Tag this Judgment!Vemuri Parandhamiah Vs. R. Narasimha Rao and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1949)2MLJ147
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of Bell, J., in a misfeasance proceedings under Section 235 of the Indian Companies Act directing that the appellant's Conduct as managing director of the company should be examined under Section 235 of the Act and that the conduct of the second respondent as official liquidator of the company now in voluntary liquidation should be similarly examined under the said section.2. Sri Vijayavada Motor Transport Company Limited was incorporated as a. private limited company under the Indian Companies Act on 17th November, 1944. On 26th November, 1944, the Board of Directors appointed the appellant as its managing director. The company commenced its business on 1st December, 1944, and the appellant continued as its managing director until 14th June, 1947. On that date, the company went into voluntary liquidation and the second respondent who was the resident of the board of directors was appointed liquidator. There were some prior...
Tag this Judgment!Puthiya Velappil Ayissama Vs. Chowakkaram Puthiya Purayil Bavachi Keyi
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad61
ORDERMack, J.1. This revision petition arises out of a rather unusual suit filed by the petitioner, the widow of one Moidu Haji, who died on 1st January 1946 to recover from the two defendants a sum of as. 172-15-0, expenses incurred by her in defending a petition, R. C. P. No. 304 of 1946, before the House Rent Controller, instituted by the defendants. The defendants are Moidu Haji's 'grandmother and her son. They sought to evict the widow in those proceedings from a block of three shops. The learned Rent Controller Mr. K. K. Mathews dismissed their petition finding it to be both frivolous and vexatious, but he expressed himself unable to grant any compensation to the petitioner and other respondents impleaded before him as, by denying the title of the petitioner before him as landlord, they had removed themselves from the purview of Section 7 (5), Madras Act XV [15] of 1946. Instead of filing any appeal against the refusal to grant any compensation under this section, a remedy open t...
Tag this Judgment!Puthiya Velappil Ayissamma Vs. Chowakkaram Puthiya Purayil Bavachi Key ...
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1949)2MLJ295
Mack, J.1. This revision petition arises out of a rather unusual suit filed by the petitioner, the widow of one Moidu Haji, who died on 1st January, 1946, to recover from the two defendants a sum of Rs. 172-15-0, expenses' incurred by her in defending a petition, R.C.P. No. 304 of 1946 before the House Rent Controller, instituted by the defendants. The defendants are Moidu Haji's grandmother and her son. They sought to evict the widow in those proceedings from a block of three shops. The learned Rent Controller Mr. K. K. Mathews dismissed their petition finding it to be both frivolous and vexatious, but he expressed himself unable to grant any compensation to the petitioner and other respondents impleaded before him as, by denying the title of the petitioner before him as landlord, they had removed themselves from the purview of Section 7(5) of the Madras; Act XV of 1946. Instead of filing any appeal against the refusal to grant any compensation under this section, a remedy open to the...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Banto and anr. Vs. Chandan
Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1949HP21
Bannerji, J.C.1. This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the District Judge dated 20th June 2004 s., decreeing the plaintiff's suit for restitution of conjugal rights.2. The plaintiff, Chandan, brought the suit against Mt. Banto, defendant 1 and her father Durga, defendant 2, on the basis of a 'Nawishat' (agreement). The defendants denied the marriage and Btated that it was only a 'Mangwali' and that the plaintiff did not fulfil the conditions embodied in the said 'Nawishat' dated 6th January 2002 s.3. One of the conditions of 'Nawishat' was that the plaintiff would remain throughout his life as 'Ghar Jawantri' or 'Ghar Jamai' in the house of his wife's father.4. It is admitted that the plaintiff left the house of his alleged father-in-law and brought this suit for taking away his so called wife. The plaintiff's own witnesses Das and Sawan-Din state that the plaintiff left the house of defendant 2 of his own accord.5. Prom the judgment of the District Judge, it appears that the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6704
- 6705
- 6706
- 6707
- 6708
- 6710
- 6711
- 6712
- 6713
- 6714
- Next ›
- Last »