-
1965 (8) TMI 107
... ... ... ... ..... income from and out of which the said property could have been purchased; (ii) the 4th defendant was managing the properties of the tavazhi on behalf of the 1st defendant; (iii) he stood in a fiduciary relationship with the members on whose behalf he was managing the properties; (iv) in every relevant transaction the 1st defendant, the karnavati, was made a party; and (v) the 4th defendant has suppressed both the accounts of the tavazhi and his personal accounts and has failed to prove that he had any personal income from ....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 106
... ... ... ... ..... r prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The past conduct or antecedent history of a person on which the authority purports to act, should ordinarily be proximate in point of time and should have a rational connection with the conclusion that the detention of the person is necessary (vide Rameshwar Shaw's case AIR 1910 SC 124) (supra)). 14. It is abundantly clear that such activities as have been alleged against the petitioner and on which his detention has been based, are rational to public peace, safety and ....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 105
... ... ... ... ..... d when it is so settled, the certificate of the Court would operate as a decree which could be executed in the normal way. There is no provision that the execution of such a decree will also be made by the High Court or come within the exclusive jurisdiction of this Court. In fact, even though the decree was transferred for execution to the Alipore Court, the judgment-debtor did not take this point to the Court below and himself made as objection under Section 47. This point is a belated one and is an attempt to defeat the....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 104
... ... ... ... ..... at there has been no judicial exercise of discretion in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred me to a decision of Ramachandra Iyer C.J. in Meenakshiammal v. Ratnasami Hilangiriyar, C.R.P. No. 731 of 1960 (Mad) where the order of the Revenue Court granting time for payment of arrears was revised and eviction ordered. But in that case it is observed The Revenue Court never applied its mind to the question whether the defaulting tenant should be granted time for the payment of rent or he should be evicted for....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 103
... ... ... ... ..... ower under S. 111 3 3 . The Central Government reversed the decision appealed from without giving any reasons; nor did the record disclose any apparent ground for the reversal. In this context, Shah, J. made the observations quoted above, and held that there was no proper trial of the appeals and the appellate order should be quashed. Hidayatullah, J. at p. 370 of the Report pointed out that there was DO reason for the reversal and the omission to give reasons led to the only inference that there was none to give. There is....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 102
... ... ... ... ..... o be quashed, the notice also must be quashed along with them. As the respondent No. 3 has no jurisdiction to commence proceedings in exercise of the inherent powers of the Civil Court, the notice dated March 27, 1963, which is the foundation of these proceedings and which clearly specified that it was a proceeding under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code must be held to be bad. 28. Before I conclude I should note that reference was made to several decisions It is not necessary for us to deal with these decisions havi....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 101
... ... ... ... ..... he matter. Therefore as held in parappa Ningappa v. Mallappa Kaliappa AIR1956Bom332 we are not bound by that decision. o p /o p (21) In this case there are no daughters and no disqualified heris. On a partition during the lifetime of Lalji Patil the plaintiff would have been entitled to one - third shares and no succession to a further one - sixth share. Her share, therefore, in the property will be one - half share. o p /o p (22) We therefore, modify the decree the of the courts below the by decreeding to the plaintiff on....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 100
... ... ... ... ..... son or persons, the assessment may be made on his legal representative either solely or jointly with that other person or persons, as the case may be. Section 21 of the Excess Profits Tax Act applies section 24B of the Income-tax Act to assessments against legal representatives. Under the power of modification conferred by section 21, rules have been framed which direct that section 22 in sub-section (3) of section 24B is to be read as section 13 of the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940. We are of opinion that these provisions ....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 99
... ... ... ... ..... rder. No question, even if of law, not arising out of the Tribunal's order can be answered by a High Court under section 66. Harla v. State of Rajasthan A.I.R. 1951 S.C. 469 is irrelevant; all that it decides is the effect of the non-publication of a resolution of a Council of Ministers. I may at the same time point out that in the case of Radhey Shiyam A.I.R. 1929 ALL 210 it was pointed out that the Excise Rules are made in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 40 and 41 of the Excise Act and have the force of ....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 98
... ... ... ... ..... a High Court on reference. Of course when the Tribunal receives the High Court's advice on reference in one year it would be bound when the same question arises in a subsequent year but it would be on the ground of stare decision and not of res judicata. 14. For the above reasons as matter of pure law also I would hold that the decision in the earlier reference did not operate as a res judicata As regards its effect as stare decision I think that it stands overruled by the decision in Ahmedabad Manufacturing Calico Pri....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 97
... ... ... ... ..... is open to the appellants to raise this contention. It has been fairly conceded by Mr. Dutt that no such plea had been raised in the writ petition filed by the appellants. Besides, it is plain that neither the Union of India, nor the State of West Bengal which are impleaded to the present proceedings make such a claim. It would indeed be surprising that even though the Union of India and the State of West Bengal expressly say that this area belongs to Pakistan under the Radcliffe Award and has to be delivered over to Pakis....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 96
... ... ... ... ..... st. In any event, such an application can not be transformed into a suit for title, adjudicating the title of a third party, claiming adversely to the company. The result is that this appeal ought to succeed. The order of the court below is set aside and the application dismissed. The administrator should make over possession to the party from whom he received possession. This order will be without prejudice to any further application being made for, either the winding up of the company, or an order under sec. 397 or 398 o....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 95
... ... ... ... ..... business of the sale, wholesale or by auction, of fruits and vegetables to just four shops in Sabzi Mandi of Malerkotla is, to use their Lordships' expression, more than a reasonable restriction on the right of the respondents in this case. 6. The respondent was denied a licence for the sale of fruits and vegetables whether wholesale or retail or by auction within the municipal limits of Malerkotla on the sole ground that he was not one of the four persons who had successfully bid for one of the four shops for that pur....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 94
... ... ... ... ..... ndment should be ordered or not, and does not affect the power of the court to order it, if that is required in the interests of justice. The case of the plaintiff for amendment in the present case stands on a stronger footing because there is no question of limitation involved and we are of the opinion that the High Court was right in permitting the amendment to be made and remanding the suit to the trial Court for a fresh hearing in accordance with law. 5. It should be added that Mr. Purshotam Trikumdas submitted that he....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 93
... ... ... ... ..... rati as the owner of one-third share are wrong and that the decree of the trial Court is right. The question of limitation may be briefly disposed of. There is no good evidence on record to establish that the respondent, prior to 1950, asserted that she had any right adverse to the plaintiffs over the property in suit or that she acted any manner which would amount to an ouster of the plaintiffs. Admittedly the dispute between the parties arose sometime in 1944. Prior to that there could. be no reason for her acting advers....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 92
... ... ... ... ..... on (1), completely accords with this legislative intent. Some reference was made to section 14(2)(aa) in the course of the arguments but that section does not throw any light on the construction of section 15C, sub-section (1). That section was necessitated because of the amendment of section 23(5)(a) and was introduced in order to give partial relief to the partners of a registered firm which became necessary by reason of the registered firm being directly made liable to pay tax under section 23(5)(a)(i) and it has nothin....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 91
... ... ... ... ..... ered by the owner of the plot in procuring the required finance to enable the assessee to complete on the said plot of land a modern cinema theatre could not be said to be connected with the acquisition of the depreciable assets. No reason has been offered for this conclusion. But even from this conclusion it does not follow that interest paid on money borrowed for the purpose of construction is not in any way connected with acquisition of depreciable assets. Therefore, the case is of no assistance to the revenue. We, ther....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 90
... ... ... ... ..... call the words of this Court which were put in the forefront by Mr. Chari that it is not permissible for the prosecution to drop a serious charge and select one which does not require the procedure under s. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If the offence was under s. 196, Indian Penal Code, a complaint in writing by the court concerned was required. Before a complaint is made the court has to consider whether it is expedient in the interests of justice to order a prosecution. In the lesser offence no such complaint b....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 89
... ... ... ... ..... ess provision. There is a simple answer to this contention. The answer is that once it is held that no party has a vested right to have his appeal to be heard by more than one judge of the High Court, no right to prefer an appeal under Art. 133 can be said to vest in him, the right under which being unavailable in case heard And disposed of by a single judge of the High Court. The argument of learned counsel thus fails. One more point was sought to be urged by learned counsel for the appellant. The point is based upon the ....... + More
-
1965 (8) TMI 88
... ... ... ... ..... me when the objection is taken in the appellate or revisional Court. The 'point is clearly brought out in the judgment of Venkatarama Aiyar, J. in Kiran Singh and others v. Chaman Paswan and others(1955 1 S.C.R. 117,122.) thus .lm15 The policy underlying sections 21 and 99 of the Civil Procedure Code and section 11 of the Suits Valuation Act is the same, namely, that when a case had been tried by a Court on the merits and judgment rendered, it should not be liable to be reversed purely on technical grounds, unless it h....... + More
