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
L. Chadammi Lal Vs. B. Govind Prasad and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All245
Agarwala, J.1. These two appeals arise out of an application under Section 12, Encumbered Estates Act.2. On 22nd November 1935, two separate application were made under Section 4, E. E. Act, one by Ram Sarup, Girwardhari and their minor sons, and the other by Govind Prasad and his sons. The application of Bam Sarup and others was numbered as 89 of 1936 and the other application of Govind Prasad and others was number, ed as 160 of 1936. First Appeal No. 258 of 1942 arises out of case No. 160 of 1936, while the other First Appeal No. 271 of 1942 arises out of case No. 89 of 1936. Proceedings under Section 14, E. E. Act, were being taken in Court. When all the evidence was finished, on 29th November 1941, an application was put in by one of the creditors, namely, Mt. Pushpawati Devi, under Section 12 of the Act, alleging that four mortgages made by the applicants in the two cases in favour of certain creditors were invalid as they had not been made in good faith after chap. I of the said ...
Tag this Judgment!Manakchand Vs. Samsingh and anr.
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj4
Bapna, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for damages. The appellant sold a she-buffalo to the respondent in Section 1995. There was a calf which the appellant did not include in the sale. According to the plaintiff it was agreed on Kartik vad 13 Section 1995 that the calf should be taken over by the respondent to be returned to the appellant when the she buffalo would calve again and on failure to do so would pay Rs. 25 by the latest on Kartik Sud 13 Section 1996. On failure to pay on the appointed date, the amount was to carry interest at 34 per cent per annum. The suit was filed on 23rd February 1945 corresponding to Fulgun Sud 18/2001 for recovery of Rs. 50 The defendant admitted having purchased the buffalo but denied the remaining allegations and the execution of the agreement The trial Court decreed the suit for Rs. 33 but on appeal, the learned Sub-Judge held that the suit was barred by limitation. He accepted the appeal and dismissed the suit. 2. In this a...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: M. Abraham
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad233
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition against the conviction of the petitioner under Section 341, Penal Code, by the Additional First Class Magistarte, Chingleput, and a fine of Rs. 50 imposed on him therefor.2. The facts are briefly these. The petitioner was the first accused in C. C. No. 686 of 1947 on the file of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Chingleput. He was the driver of bus No. MDH 787- The prosecution case is that, on 27th September 1947, he purposely made his bus stand across the Thirukkalikundram Road, at Chingleput, near the Chowki post in such a manner as to prevent another bus, MDH 1167, which was coming from behind, to proceed further. When P. W. 1, the driver of MDH 1167 turned his bus to the right, to avoid and pass the petitioner's bus, the petitioner deliberately and intentionally drove his bus MDH 787 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against bus No. 1167, causing damage, and thereby committing an act endangering the life of the passenger...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Devata Lakshminarayana
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad266
Horwill, J.1. The petitioner is said to have transported explosive substances, such as potassium chlorate, potassium nitrate, and sulphur from Bezwada to Jeggayyapet. He was arrested on 1st January 1949 for having committed an offence punishable under the Explosive Substances Act (Act VI [6] of 1908); but instead of being brought to trial for this offence, he was served on 30th January 1949, with an order of detention under Act, I [1] of 1947. Grounds of detention were served on 1st March 1949; and nine days later a charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner and two other. On 17th March 1949, the petitioner made the usual representations, denying that he had any connection with communists, saying that he had always been a staunch supporter of the Congress Party, and had contributed to their funds. These representations were sent to the District Magistrate by the Government for report; and three months elapsed before the District Magistrate sent in his report on 21st June 1949. The m...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Ponnuswami
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad308
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition to interfere in revision with the conviction ,of. the petitioner under Section 304A, Penal Code and the sentence of six months simple imprisonment awarded on him.2. The facts are briefly these. The petitioner was a lorry driver. On 10th October 1947, at about 6.45 p. m., on the road between Tambaram and Vandalur, he was driving his lorry, M. S. P. 3163, at a fast and dangerous pace. He was taking furniture to a School. He wanted to overtake three bullock carts heavily laden with hay, and with that object, first swerved swiftly to the right and then quickly to the left, with the inevitable consequence that the deceased, a man aged 30 going along the road in the opposite direction, and a bit tipsy, got knocked down and killed. Both the lower Courts, after exhaustive discussion of the evidence, have come to the conclusion that the petitioner was certainly guilty of rash and negligent driving, and brought about the death of the deceased by s...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmidhar Misra Vs. Rangalal
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR458
Radcliffe, J.1. This appeal is concerned with the legal status of two parcels of land comprising 3-90 acres in all in the village of Byree, Killa Darpan, district Cuttack, Orissa. These two parcels, which may conveniently be referred to aw 'the disputed area,' are themselves part of a plot No. 1990-2401 in the same village, the plot lying to the west of the Bengal-Nagpur railway line which intersects the village. The documents in this case, not excluding the judgments, do not make it always an easy task to determine whether the whole plot No. 1990-2401 is not more properly the subject of dispute than that portion of it which is described as the disputed area. In fact all the relevant evidence bears as much upon the status of the larger as of the smaller area. However that may be, the appellants' case is that the disputed area must be recognised in law as a cremation ground of the village and that, it being so, no part of the site can be made available for the purposes of private indust...
Tag this Judgment!Salar Bux Haji Ramzan Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P., C.P. a ...
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All531; [1952]21ITR449(All)
1. This is a reference under Section 66(1), Income-tax Act, as applied to the Excess Profits Act by Section 21 of the latter Act. 2. The assesses, Messrs Haji Salar Bux Haji Ramzan of Tanda, district Faizabad, besides having business in British India, has cloth business at Bhutwal in Nepal which is outside British India. On the assessment made by the Excess Profits Tax Officer the whole of the assessee's income from business, whether carried on in British India or outside British India, was assessed to Excess Profits Tax. The assessee claimed that from the entire profits computed from the business outside British India, that is, Bhutwal cloth business, a sum of Rs. 4500 should be deducted in accordance with the third proviso to Section 4 (1), Income-tax Act. 3. On appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner decided in favour of the assessee, but on further appeal the Appellate Tribunal held that the proviso was not applicable and the assessee was not entitled to the deduction of Rs. 45...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Nojali Vs. Sarkar
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj5
1. This is an appeal by the accused Mt. Nojali, wife of Durga Jat against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge convicting and sentencing her under Section 302, M. P. C. to rigorous imprisonment for life for causing the death of Idan, sou of Karnia, Jat, a lad of 8 years of age, on the morning of 6th May 1939.2. The houses of Karnia and Mt. Nojali are situate doge to each other and it appears that the deceased Idan used to go to the house of Mt. Nojali to play with her son Kana who was of the same age. The prosecution story is that on the morning of 6th May 1948 at about 8 O clock, Idan went to Nojali'a house but never came back. In the evening when Karnia, father of the deceased, came home, the latter a mother informed him that Idan was not present. Karnia went to the Kot and informed the Hawaldar P. W. 2 Sbankerlal of this fact. Shankerlal accompanied by P. W. 4 Kalyansingh, P. W. 6 Rambuxsingh, P. W. 7 Bhuria and two other persona came to Nojali's house and inquired from her wh...
Tag this Judgment!M. Munuswami Naicker Vs. P. Kanniappa Naicker
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad273
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is an interesting case. The first Class Bench Court, Tiruvottiyur, discharged the respondent Kanniappa, in a case under Section 504, Penal Code. The respondent abused the petitioner in obscene terms stating: 'May his wife be ravished. May the hydrocelic fellow (the petitioner is said to have hydrccele) be beaten till his hydrcocele is blown to bits.'This abuse was uttered in the absence of the petitioner, but the people who heard the abuse--they were members of the Panchayat--conveyed it to the petitioner, Muniswamni Naicker, who felt highly put out on hearing their report and felt like committing a breach of the peace but restrained himself with an effort. 2. The question is whether, in these circumstances an offence under Section 504, Penal Code, was made out prima facie. Mr. Asker Ali, for the petitioner, urged with great vehemence that there is really no distinction between a man who utters such words to Panchayatdars and ask them to convey the wo...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: K. Vedanta Desikan
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad283
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is a petition to revise the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Cheyyar, refusing the request of the petitioner, who is accused in C. C. No. 108 of 1948, on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Cheyyar, of the offence of failure to pay the sales tax due to Government, under Section 15, Madras General Sales Tax Act, to summon defence witnesses at Government expense, and directing him to pay the batta of Rs. 140, required for the defence witnesses he wanted to be summoned. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor contra. The learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposes this petition. I agree with him. The position in law is clear. Section 544, Criminal P. C., says: 'Subject to any rules made by the Provincial Government, any Criminal Court may, if it thinks fit, order payment, on the part of Government, of the reasonable expenses of any complainant, or witness attending for the purposes of any inqu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6771
- 6772
- 6773
- 6774
- 6775
- 6777
- 6778
- 6779
- 6780
- 6781
- Next ›
- Last »