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
New Garage Ltd. Vs. Khuswant Singh and anr.
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H82
Kapur, J. 1. The facts which have given rise to this revision may be briefly stated as follows. On 1-4-1940 Sir Sobha Singh gave on lease to Messrs. The New Garage, Limited, New Delhi, show room No. 11 in the Scindia House, New Delhi & a garage behind enough for fixing two ramps). The rent was originally Rs. 250 a month but it had since been raised to Rs. 501-7 per mensem. In the lease deed marked Ex. D-1 it was agreed by the parties as follows:'1. That the landlord agrees to let his show room No. 11 in the Seindia House, New Delhi, & a garage behind enough for fixing two ramps hereinafter called 'the property' & the tenant agrees to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 250 regularly in advance. ***** 5. That the teuanoy (really the tenant) agrees to use the property as a motor show room & workshop. ***** On 37-4-1946 Sir Sobha Singh Bent a notice to the New Garage, Limited, stating that the occupation of show room No. 11 was without an existing lease & gave a notice to vacate the premises within...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sri M.P. Viswanatha Rao (Died) and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad393; [1950]18ITR68(Mad)
Viswanatha Sastri, J.1. The question that has been referred to us is in these terms:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the sum of Rs. 5750 described as additional dividend to be satisfied by issue of three per cent, bearer deposit certificates is not income liable to tax as dividend.'The assessee is a non-resident. In order to arrive at his total income for the purposes of Indian income-tax, the Income-tax Officer, included a sum of Rs. 5750 stated to have been paid to the assessee by the Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., by the issue of 3 per cent, bearer deposit certificates. The company, in view of war conditions, decided not to pay the sum of Rs. 5750 in cash to the share holder but issued bearer deposit certificates for the sum which was made payable on or before 10th August 1945, with interest at 3 per cent interest being payable annually. The question is whether this sum of Rs. 5750 which was not paid in cash but which is represented by the deposit certificat...
Tag this Judgment!Basantlal Jagatramka Vs. Dominion of India
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal340
Harries, C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order of Sinha J. dated 4-5-1949 allowing en application for stay of a suit pending arbitration proceedings.2. On 9-9-1944 the appellant entered into a contract with the Dominion of India for the supply of bales of hay. The contract contained an arbitration clause which was clause 21 of the contract. That clause reads as follows:'Any dispute or difference arising out of this contract, settlement of which is not hereinbefore provided for, shall be referred to the arbitration of the officer sanctioning the contract whose decision shall be final & binding'.3. In a note appended to the contract there is a provision that in the case of contracts made by the Military Farms Department the District Commander concerned shall be the arbitrator under clause 21. It is conceded that the contract in question was a contract made with the Military Farms Department & therefore the Dist. Commander was the arbitrator named in the contract.4. On the last day of li...
Tag this Judgment!Manaka and Others Vs. Madharao and Others
Court : Privy Council
Reported in : AIR1950PC25
SIR LIONEL LEACH: This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur allowing an appeal from a decree of the Additional Judge of Chanda. The appeal has arisen out of a suit filed by Arjuna (the husband of appellant 1 and the father of appellants 2, 3 and 4) and appellants 5, 6 and 7 (the brothers of Arjuna) to enforce payment of the sum of Rs. 12,553.0.3, claimed to be due on a mortgage executed in their favour by Mt. Bajabai, her son Saoji (father of respondent 1 and the husband of respondents 2 and 3), and respondents 4 and 6 (Saoji's brothers) and on behalf of certain minors. Arjuna, Bajabai and Saoji have died during the course of the litigation. The Additional District Judge held that the minor defendants had no interest in the property mortgaged and this finding has not been challenged. Consequently, they have not been made parties to the appeal. 2. The respondents' case is that in the month of December 1934, the mortgagees agreed to accept the sum of Rs. 9...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Kisan Narayan
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1951Bom186; (1950)52BOMLR280; 1952CriLJ41
Chainani, J.1. This is an appeal by the Government of Bombay against the acquittal of two accused persons who had been charged with having committed offences punishable under Clauses (a), (b) and (h) of Section 43 (1) of the Bombay Abkari Act. The facts of the case briefly are that on 7th July 1948, Sub-Inspector D'Souza was on patrol duty at Dharavi Creek along with two Police Constables. He noticed smoke from a distance, got into a toney and went to the place from which smoke was coming. He then saw accused 2 attending to a still. Accused 1 was sitting about 20 feet away from the still. Both the accused tried to run away, but they were chased and arrested. The still and other articles used for manufacturing liquor were seized. The two accused were then sent for trial. The prosecution examined the Sub-Inspector, D'Souza, and a Police Constable, Gangaram, who had accompanied him in order to prove the above facts. Both the accused pleaded not guilty. They stated that they were fishermen...
Tag this Judgment!Premchand Roychand and Sons Vs. Moti Lall Agarwala
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1951Bom249; (1950)52BOMLR643
Bhagwati, J.1. His Lordship, after stating facts, proceeded:] Before I proceed to discuss the merits of the case, I shall first deal with what could have been urged as a preliminary objection or could have been asked to be tried as a preliminary issue, viz., whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this suit. The contention of the defendant in this behalf has been that he was residing in and carrying on business in Delhi that the contract was made by the acceptance by him of the offer of the plaintiffs in Delhi, that the performance of the contract was to be made and was in fact offered by the plaintiffs to him in Delhi, that the breach of the contract, if any, took place in Delhi and that therefore the whole cause of action having arisen in Delhi, this Court has no jurisdiction to try this suit in spite of the leave under Clause 12, Letters Patent having been granted. It is clear on the correspondence which has been put in before me that the offer to sell the 110 shares, thoug...
Tag this Judgment!Ghulam HussaIn Vs. the King
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR508
Lionel Leach, J.1. This is an appeal, by special leave, from an order of the Chief Court of Sind, made in the exercise of its appellate criminal jurisdiction, summarily dismissing an appeal by the appellant from his conviction on charges of kidnapping a girl named Jasoda, aged eleven years, with intent to force her to illicit intercourse, and of raping her. The appellant was tried at the Chief Court Sessions jointly with his servant, Fatehsing, who was accused of having taken part in the kidnapping and of abetment of the rape. By a majority of 7 to 2 the jury found both the accused guilty of the offences charged against them. The learned Judge (Constantine J.) accepted the verdict and sentenced the appellant to two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code on the charge of kidnapping and to eight years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 on the charge of rape, the sentences to run concurrently. He sentenced Fatehsing to two years rigorous imprisonment u...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmanrao Kristrao Vs. Provincial Government of Bombay and anr.
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom334; (1950)52BOMLR316
Chagla, C.J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovering non-agricultural assessment levied on the land in suit. The Provincial Government of Bombay is defendant 1 to the suit and the District Local Board of Dharwar is defendant 2. Both the Courts below have dismissed the plaintiff's suit.2. It would appear that the plaintiff is the inamdar of a moiety of the village of Hole Alur in Ron Taluka, and the land in suit, survey No. 161B, forms part of the moiety belonging to the plaintiff. On 16th April 1923, the Government of Bombay passed a resolution deciding to acquire this land for a public purpose, the purpose being the erection of a school to be run by the District Local Board. Acquisition proceedings were started and they ultimately terminated in an award being made on 2nd October 1923. Under this award, a sum of Rs. 1368-80 was paid to one Angadi whose predecessor-in-title became a permanent tenant, the land having been leased to him by a predece...
Tag this Judgment!A.A. Khan and ors. Vs. Ameer Khan and ors.
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1950Kant11; AIR1950Mys11
ORDER1. This is an application under Order 41, Rule 5, Civil P.C. The point for consideration is wether pending R.A. 64 of 49-50, the execution of the decree of the lower Court has to be stayed on appellants furnishing security.2. The lower Court has passed a decree for payment of Rs. 12,000 claimed to have been contributed by the plaintiffs towards their share of capital of a partnership concern for the dissolution of which the suit was filed and has passed also a preliminary decree for dissolution of partnership with a direction that accounts should be taken for ascertaining the income of the partnership concern. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that even if the plaintiffs have contributed Rs. 12,000 towards capital to the partnership concern there can be no decree for any amount at this stage, i.e. before accounts are taken. What is due to the plaintiffs or by them can only be ascertained after going through the accounts and in case there was a loss as contended by appell...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Aziz Vs. Rex
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All364
ORDERBind Basni Prasad, J.1. The petitioner, Abdul Aziz, and one Asghar Ali were found in possession of one seer 4 chhataks and 1 seer 12 chhataks respectively of crude opium on 26th May 1948, at about 9 A. M. at the entrance of an opium smoking den. They were arrested on the spot and were prosecuted under Section 9, Opium Act. Learned Magistrate convicted them under Section 9, Opium Smoking Act, and sentenced them each to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three mouths. In appeal the learned Sessions Judge upheld the conviction and sentence. The conviction recorded by the Sessions Judge, however, is under Section 9, Opium Act. The trying Magistrate committed an error in recording the conviction under Section 9, Opium Smoking Act. Section 9 of that Act provides for presumption raised by presence of opium and of opium smoking apparatus. It does not provide for any offence. On the other hand, Section 9, Opium Act makes the illegal possession of opium an offence. Learned Sessions Judge was...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6794
- 6795
- 6796
- 6797
- 6798
- 6800
- 6801
- 6802
- 6803
- 6804
- Next ›
- Last »