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
Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax Vs. Goculdoss Jamnadoss and Co.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad773; (1950)IIMLJ9
Satyanarayana Rao, J.1. The question referred to us by the Appellate Tribunal is as follows:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the interest receipt of Rs. 43,299/- in question is exempt from excess profits tax as profit of a 'part of a business' accruing or arising in Mysore Stats within the meaning of proviso 3 to S. 5, Excess Profits Tax Act?'The question is confined to the interest receipt of Rs. 43,293/-. The assessee Messrs. Gokuldas Jamnadas and Company are residents in British India, carrying on money-lending business at Madras. The chargeable accounting period is the period commencing from 9th November 1942 and ending with 28th October 1943. During that period the assessee received the sum in question as interest accrued under a loan advanced to Messrs. M.L. Varadamanayya and Sons, Mysore, under a mortgage. The property comprised in the mortgage is in Mysore and the deed was executed on Mysore stamp paper and registered at Mysore. This amount was assesse...
Tag this Judgment!Premananda Vs. Dhirendra Nath Ganguly and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal397,54CWN454
Das Gupta, J.1. The petitioner instituted a suit for partition on the allegation that along with the opposite parties he was in joint possession of three plots of lands C. S. Plots Nos. 9313, 9311 and 9315 of Monza Bali. In view of the allegation and the nature of relief claimed he paid fixed court-fees of Rs. 15. After both parties had examined their witnesses and produced documents and closed their evidence the learned Subordinate Judge heard the arguments of the parties and then passed an order directing the appointment of a commissioner to ascertain the proper valuation of the suit property being of opinion that ad valorem court-fees on the value of the property was payable on the plaint. It is against this order that the plaintiff has filed the application and a rule was issued on the opposite parties to show cause why this order should not be set aside The ground for the learned Subordinate Judge's decision that ad valorem court-fee was payable was a statement made by the plainti...
Tag this Judgment!Esrali Molla and ors. Vs. Adhir Kumar Saha and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal502,54CWN489
G.N. Das, J.1. This application in revision is at the instance of certain mortgagees. The mortgage loan was taken on 13th August 1932, The mortgagees instituted a suit for recovery of the sum due on the mortgage treating the claim as one foe recovery of money and not as a claim for enforcement of the security, The suit was, therefore, not framed in terms of Order 34, Civil P. C. The decree was put into execution when the judgment-debtors made an application under Section 34(1),(b) and Section 86, Bengal Money-lenders Act. The decree-holders raised certain preliminary objections to the maintainability of the application. One of the objections with which we are now concerned related to the prayer of the judgment-debtors for instalments under Section 34(1)(b), Bengal Money-lenders Act. 2. The learned Subordinate Judge has refused to re-open the decree under Section 36, Bengal Money-lenders Act, on the ground that the decree does not contravene the provisions of Section 30 of the Act. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Benares Bank Ltd. Vs. Official Assignee
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR488
Lionel Leach, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was tried in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, of Dhanbad. The real question for decision is whether that Court had jurisdiction to grant the relief sought or whether it was a matter which could only be dealt with by the Calcutta High Court in its insolvency jurisdiction. The answer requires the consideration of a scheme of composition, a deed of transfer executed in connection therewith, and proceedings in insolvency extending over a period of more than 20 years.2. The appellant is a limited liability company which is now in liquidation. Its business was banking and it will be convenient to refer to it hereinafter as 'the bank.' In 1909 the bank advanced large sums of money to a partnership of five persons, trading under the style of M.L. Laik and Bantierjee. The loans were made against hundis, which were secured by mortgages of immoveable property. Default was made in the repayment of the loans and the bank was compelled t...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkissendas Dhanuka Vs. Satya Charan Law
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR501
Greene, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court at Fort William affirming on appeal a judgment and decree of the same Court in its original jurisdiction. The questions raised in the litigation relate to the validity of two resolutions of the respondent company Lothian Jute Mills Ltd. (hereinafter called 'the company'). By the first of these, resolutions (which were passed at a requisitoned general meeting of the company held on June 3, 1945), the appellants (other than S.P. Bose, who was one of the requisitionists), seven in number, were appointed to be directors of the company in addition to the four existing directors, one of whom was the respondent Dr. Satya Charan Law. By the second resolution it was resolved that the termination of the appointment of the managing agents of the company, Messrs. Andrew Yule and Co. Ltd. was to be recorded and in any event that they were thereby forthwith removed from their office. In the action the respondent Dr. Law on b...
Tag this Judgment!Arjun Sukla Vs. Jujesthi Sukla and anr.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1954Ori52
Jagannadhadas, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant in this second appeal; It arises out of a suit for partition in respect of 253 acres of homestead land in Cuttack town bearing plot No. 74 in Khata No. 553 of the current settlement. The plaintiff claims title to a ten annas-eight-pies share thereof. He claims five-annas four pies share under a deed of gift, Ext, 1, dated 7-1-41 and the other five-annas-four pies under a sale-deed, Ext. 2 dated 9-6-1944. Both the courts below have decreed the plaintiff's suit in respect of a five-annas-four-pies share, but have dismissed it in respect of the other five-annas-four-pies share. The plaintiff has accordingly brought the second appeal in respect of the five-annas-four-pies share for which his suit has been dismissed.2. The suit-plot originally belonged to three brothers, Nakfodi, Gangai and Chaitan. Defendant 1 is the son of Nakfodi. The plaintiff's case is that all the three brothers were separated and he claims five annas four pies share unde...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Jinatun Nisa Bibi and anr. Vs. Mt. Idrakun Nisa and ors.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1950Ori183
Panigrahi, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, granting a decree to the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of Rs. 7530 as her dower debt due from the estate of her deceased husband. The point debated on this appeal is whether a Court, while rejecting an application to sue in forma pauperis, can grant time to the petitioner for payment of court-fee and whether in such a case the suit shall be deemed to have been instituted on the day of the presentation of the pauper application.2. The facts briefly are that the plaintiff started her suit with an application under Order 33, Rule 2, Civil P. C. praying for permission to sue in forma pauperis. That application sets out in detail all the particulars required for a plaint, states the cause of action and the relief that the plaintiff is entitled to, and in the prayer portion contains a request (1) that the petitioner be permitted to sue as a pauper; and (2) that she may be given a decree fo...
Tag this Judgment!Sarkar Vs. Jalamsingh
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1950Raj28
ORDER1. This is a reference by the learned District Magistrate observing that the learned Magistrate who convicted the accused under Sections 307 and 326 was not justified in giving him the benefit of Sections 562 (1) Criminal P. C., and recommending that the accused should be given a sentence of rigorous imprisonment instead.2. The accused is represented and the learned counsel on his behalf has argued that he is entitled also to show cause against the conviction of the accused under Section 307, Penal Code, The learned counsel obviously assumes that this is a case of enhancement of sentence and that accordingly under Section 439, Sub-section (6) it is open to him to show while opposing the motion for enhancement that the acaused had been wrongly convicted by the Court below. It may be pointed out that in a case under Section 562 (1), Criminal P. C., the Magistrate does not pass a sentence and merely directs the release of the accused on his executing a bond with or without sureties t...
Tag this Judgment!Periasami Kachirayar and ors. Vs. Varadappa Kachirayar (Died) and ors.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad486
Raghava Rao, J.1. The question of law argued in this second appeal is whether the recital in a will that the property dealt with thereunder is the property of the testator is relevant evidence under the Evidence Act.2. Mr. Veeraraghavan contends that it is not, and relies on the decision in Satindra Kumar v. Krishna Kumari, 36 I. C. 882 : A. I. R. 1917 Cal. 805, a Bench decision of the Calcutta High Court. That case related to a suit for possession of land as Brahmottar in which there was a will produced by the predecessor-in-title of the plaintiff containing a recital of Brabmottar title. It was held that the will was inadmissible under Section 32(1) read with Section 13(a), (Evidence Act). There is to be found in that judgment no reasoning in support of the conclusion beyond what has just been stated.3. The learned counsel for the appellants seeks to justify that decision on the analogy of the decision in Gujjalal v. Fattehlal, 6 cal. 171: 6 C. L. R. 439 in which it was held that it ...
Tag this Judgment!Karumuri Surayya Vs. Thadepalli Pushpavalli Thayaramma and ors.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad618
Chandra Redi, J.1. This civil revision petition raises a question of some importance regarding the interpretation of Order 9, Rule 13, Civil P. C. This petition is filed by the defendant seeking to revise the order of the District Judge who. confirmed the order of the District Munsif allowing his application to set aside an ex parte decree subject to certain conditions. 2. The petitioner filed C. M. P. No. 1014 of 1946 for setting aside an ex parte decree passed against him on 10th July 1946. The District Munsif allowed the application of the petitioner subject 'only to the condition that the costs of the suit and the mesne profits decreed were deposited into Court. The defendant who was aggrieved by that order preferred an appeal to the District Judge, Kistna, complaining that the conditions imposed were onerous. The District Judge dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order of the trial Court holding that the Munsif had a wide discretion in imposing such terms as he thought fit. 3. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6804
- 6805
- 6806
- 6807
- 6808
- 6810
- 6811
- 6812
- 6813
- 6814
- Next ›
- Last »