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
Raj Kumar Vs. Ved Roop Narain
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All293
ORDERAgarwala, J.1. This is a decree-holder's application in revision against an order of the learned Munsif of Moradabad allowing an application for the restoration of an objection under Order 21, Rule 97, Civil P. C. The objection was dismissed on the date of hearing for want of prosecution. The objector made an application for restoration of his objection, under Sections 141, 151 and Order 9. Rule 9, Civil P. C., alleging that on the date of hearing he was sitting in the court compound in front of the court room but as he was hard of hearing, he did not hear his case being called. The decree-holder objected to the application being allowed on the ground that none of the sections under which the application was made applied. He did not challenge the fact that the objector was hard of hearing. The learned Munsif held that although Order 9, Rule 9, Civil P. C. did not apply, he could restore an objection under his inherent powers. He, therefore, restored the objection on payment of Rs....
Tag this Judgment!The Jagat Bus Service Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All295; [1950]18ITR13(All)
Malik, C.J. 1. This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, under Section 65 (1), Income-tax Act of 1922. The assessment year in question was 1943-44 and the financial year was 1942 43. The assessee was a registered firm, Messrs. Jagat Bus Service, Saharanpur. It carries on the business of running motor cars, buses and trucks on hire. On 12th June 1940, the assessee entered into an agreement with the Tehri Durbar for plying motor vehicles on hire on the Munikireti-Dhaulsut-Deoprayag-Kirtinagar Motor Road within the territories of the Tehri Garhwal State. The agreement was for a period of five years commencing from 13th April 1940, and the assessee was given monopoly rights for plying motor car vehicles on hire on this road. Before this agreement was entered into, motor vehicles could run on this road but they were liable to pay a tax of Rs. 10 per trip per motor vehicle. Under this agreement, the assessee had to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000 annually as nazarana in the b...
Tag this Judgment!Sajjad Ali Vs. Shahid Ali and anr.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All316
Agarwala, J. 1. These are two connected appeals arising out of two suits. First Appeal No. 167 of 1943 arises out of Suit No. 37 of 1941 filed by Saiyid Sajjad Ali, the present appellant. The defendants to that suit were Saiyid Shahid Ali and Saiyid Zahid Ali, both brothers, the present respondents. This suit was for possession over a portion of plot No. 377 which had been, alleged to have been constructed upon by Shahid Ali respondent 1, for recovery of Rs. 500/- as the price of bricks and other materials utilised by the said Saiyid Shahid Ali in constructing his house, for the recovery of Rs. 100/- as price of the trees cut and appropriated by him, for damages for making pits in plot No. 377 and for a perpetual injunction restraining Saiyid Shahid Ali from interfering with the right of way of Saiyid Sajjad Ali through the plot in dispute. 2. The other appeal No. 478 of 1943 arises out of a Suit No. 536 of 1941 in which Saiyid Shahid Ali, respondent 1, was the plaintiff and Saiyid Saj...
Tag this Judgment!Mishrimal Gulabchand of Beawar, in Re.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1950]18ITR75(All)
MALIK, C.J. - The facts of this case are very simple. The assessee, Mishrimal Gulabchand, is a Hindu undivided family doing business at Beawar Ajmer-Merwara. The relevant assessment year is 1944-45. In the relevant account year the assessee was a resident and ordinarily resident in British India. The assessee had speculated individually and in partnership in various commodities in British India and also in Indian States. From its individual business carried on in British India the assessee had made a profit of Rs. 38.473, while from its individual business in the Indian States it suffered a loss of Rs. 25,391. In computing the total income from business of the assessee the Income-tax Officer did not debit the loss suffered in Indian States. This decision was upheld by the Assistant Income-tax Commissioner. On appeal the Appellate Tribunal reversed the decision of the Income-tax Commissioner and held that the proviso to Section 24(1) of the Act did not apply. On an application made by t...
Tag this Judgment!Nasir Ali Khan and anr. Vs. Government
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj51
ORDERTrilochan Datt, J.1. These are two revision applications, No. 2029 of 1949, preferred by Alla Noor Khan accused and no. 201 of 1940 by Nazir Ali Khan accused, against the order dated 18-6-49 of the Magistrate, 1st Class, Chhabra, committing the accused to Sessions under section 120(b), 420, 409 & 109, Penal Code, Both the accused have prayed in their respective applications for quashing the committal order. These revisions have arisen out of the same case and they are disposed of by one single judgment.2. Nasir Ali khan accused was a Tehsildar in Tonk State, while Alla Noor Khan was a Patwari. At the time of the commission of the offence, Nasir Ali khan was acting as Nazim, Chhabra. Both the applicants were challaned under Sections 409 & 467, Penal Code, along with five others Abdul Majid Khan, Naimulla Khan, Muqrab Rehman Khan, Mohammed Shafi and Mohammed Amin, Abdul Majid Khan was a Nazim in the State and he was discharged by the Committing Magistrate. Naimulla Khan, Muqrab Rehm...
Tag this Judgment!Golden Knitting Co. Vs. Mural Traders (India)
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad293
Raghava Rao, J.1. The question in this case is whether the District Court of Coimbatore in the Dominion of India has power to execute, after 15th August 1947, a decree passed by the Court of Small Causes at Karachi in the Dominion of Pakistan prior to that date and transmitted for execution after that day by that Court to the District Court of Coimbatore. The learned District Judge in the Court below held that he had the power. The learned District Judge is obviously wrong. After the appointed day the judgment of the Court at Karachi passed before then became a foreign judgment in respect of which execution could only be had if the territory in which the decree in question was passed has become, by an arrangement between the two Dominions, a reciprocating territory within the meaning of Section 44A, Civil P. C. The precise point now arising for decision has, been decided by a Bench of the High Court of Calcutta composed of Mookerjee and Chunder JJ , in a case reported in Dominion of In...
Tag this Judgment!Venkatarama Ayyangar Vs. Thulasi Ammal
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad320
Raghava Rao, J.1. This appeal arises out of a petition by the mother of the minor, aged about 13 her natural guardian, under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act for recovery of her custody from her paternal aunt's husband. The petitioner succeeded in the Court below.2. It is argued for the appellant that the mother does not satisfy the definition of 'guardian' in Section 4, Sub-section (2), Guardians and Wards Act and that her petition under Section 25 of the Act is not therefore maintainable. The point made is that she is not a person in truth and in fact having the care of the person of the minor because it is the paternal aunt and her husband that are actually having such care. It is also said that she is not a guardian appointed or declared as such. I do not agree. Noshirwan v. Sharoshbanu, : AIR1934Bom311 supports my view. It is there held that the word 'guardian' in the section is used in a wide sense and does not necessarily mean a guardian duly appointed or declared by th...
Tag this Judgment!Golden Knitting Co. Vs. Mural Traders (India) in Sind Market
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1949)2MLJ822
Raghava Rao, J.1. The question in this case is whether the District Court of Coimbatore in the Dominion of India has power to execute, after the 15th August, 1947, a decree passed by the Court of Small Causes at Karachi in the Dominion of Pakistan prior to that date and transmitted for execution after that date by that court to the, District Court of Coimbatore. The learned District Judge in the Court below held that he had the power. The learned District Judge is obviously wrong. After the appointed day the judgment of the Court at Karachi passed before then became a foreign judgment in respect of which execution could only be had if the territory in which the decree in question was passed has become, by an arrangement between the two Dominions, a reciprocating territory within the meaning of Section 44-A of the Civil Procedure Code. The precise point now arising for decision has been decided by a Bench of the High Court of Calcutta composed of Mookerjee and Chunder, JJ., in a case re...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Lal Vs. Madari and anr.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All237
Wali Ullah, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 6A, Court-fees Act, by the defendant who has been called upon to make good a deficiency in court fee in regard to the amount of set-off claimed by him in the suit.2. It appears that the plaintiffs respondents filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 38,000. The plain-tiff's case was that they acted as Commission Agents of the defendant and supplied vegetables and fruits to the Military authorities at Jhansi on behalf of the defendant who is a vegetable merchant.3. The claim has been laid at Rs. 38,000 as the unpaid price for the supplies made by the plaintiffs. The defendant contested the suit. He filed a written statement in which he admitted that he entered into a contract with the Military authorities for the supply of vegetables and fruits. Thereafter, according to him, he entered into a contract with the plaintiffs under which the plaintiffs were to supply the vegetables and fruits to the Military authorities on his behalf on certain terms....
Tag this Judgment!Bhimsen Mahapatra Vs. Ramachandra Das and ors.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1950Ori123
Panigrahi, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the appellant for possession of 2.89 acres of land in Khata 158 in Mouza Eaikera. His case is that the suit lands which originally stood recorded in the name of a deity, Guru Grantha Sabeb, were put up for sale in execution of a rent decree and were purchased by defendant 6, Padma Matha, on 26th April 1937 for Rs. 72; that the appellant (plaintiff) purchased the same from defendant 6 by a registered sale-deed, dated 18th August 1941, for a sum of Rs. 200 and that he was disturbed in the possession by defendants 1 to 5. Defendant 1 is the main con-testing defendant and defendants 2 to 5 are his tenants. 2. The case of defendant 1 is that an ancestor of his Mahant Saheb Ram Das, gifted 57 of acre in plots 275 of the suit lands to one Madhusudan Tripathy. Bat neither the said Madhusudan nor his son Chintamoni paid the rent due to the zamindar. Defendant is Guru Mahant Madhab Das deliberately defaulted in payment of the rent and in...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6774
- 6775
- 6776
- 6777
- 6778
- 6780
- 6781
- 6782
- 6783
- 6784
- Next ›
- Last »