-
1965 (5) TMI 51
... ... ... ... ..... ose contract either under the Common law principles or under the principles adumbrated in the Carriers Act the liability of the common carrier could be limited. As we have already observed, the learned Judge has not approached the matter from a correct angle in dealing with this aspect of the matter. Dhanna Lal was not shown to have any authority from the owner to enter into such a special contract. It is only the plaintiff himself or his duly authorised agent who could relieve the common carrier of his absolute responsibi....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 50
... ... ... ... ..... may be mentioned that the lower appellate Court was careful enough to say that there was substantial cause for the admission of Ex. P-4. It would be observed that in clause (b) it is definitely mentioned that the appellate Court if it requires the document for any other substantial cause may allow such evidence to be produced. The words for any other substantial cause must be read with the word requires in the beginning of the sentence and need not be construed in the narrow sense suggested by the doctrine of ejusdem gener....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 49
... ... ... ... ..... f selection to certain posts under it which were higher in the rank held by him and when his services stood temporarily placed at the disposal of the Public Works Department, and that thereby he was subjected to a denial of equal opportunity of promotion, and thereby Article 16 of the Constitution was violated. 10. We accordingly allow this petition and hold that the orders passed by the Board on the 29th April, 1961, and subsequent orders confirming respondents Nos. 4 to 14 shall be inoperative against him, and we further....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 48
... ... ... ... ..... the finding that nothing is due by the plaintiff to the defendants under the transaction, Exhibit 43. There is no substance in this contention. The first appellate Court recorded inconsistent findings. Having held that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to determine whether defendant No. 1 was a mortgagee in possession or a tenant, the lower appellate Court should have stayed the suit pending decision of that question by the Mamlatdar, and until such a decision was given, the Court could not proceed on the footing that th....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 47
... ... ... ... ..... and 16(2), the courts have to come to the conclusion that the benefit of the grossing up provision in section 16(2) is only available to a ' shareholder ' and none else. That does not mean that the dividend as such cannot be treated as the income of the real owner of the shares. We do not agree with this decision. In our opinion the case is not consistent with the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shakuntala 1961 43 ITR 352 (SC). That case does not appear ....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 46
... ... ... ... ..... Shariat Act was extended to it. In the circumstances, therefore, we hold that the Khan Bahadur was incompetent to make a will and that consequently the property left by him must devolve on his heirs as if he had died intestate. It was contended by Mr. Agarwala that the will was accepted by the heirs of the late Khan Bahadur and therefore the question of his capacity to make it could not arise. Apart from anything else, there is no proof of this on the record. We, therefore, reject his contention. 15. The third point raised....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 45
... ... ... ... ..... y in view of the decision in Greene's case, 1942 AC 284, I think, it would have been necessary to send the case back to the learned Single Judge to consider the affidavit of the respondent in the light of the decision in Greene's case, 1942 AC 284 and then proceed to dispose of the matter. But it is not now necessary as has already been explained. 12. The learned Single Judge has referred three questions to the Full Bench and, ordinarily, when the questions have been answered, the case goes back for disposal in the....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 44
... ... ... ... ..... ere validly initiated and it was not necessary to issue the notice under section 34 read with section 22 to every member of the family. That case has no applicability to the present case since the question there was entirely different. Again reference has been made to Mathra Das and Sons v. Commissioner of Income-tax 1933 1 I.T.R. 412. In that case the learned judges of the Lahore High Court rejected the contention of the assessee that the income-tax authorities having accepted the allegation about partition of the family ....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 43
... ... ... ... ..... , if the document clearly discloses an intention to effect a transfer. In the instant case, Ex. B-2 clearly discloses an intention to transfer all the rights of Baithan to defendants 1 to 5, and though the word surrender is used and though the deed is styled a release deed, it operates as an assignment. 10. In view of this finding, it must follow that the kanom rights under Ex. A-3 were duly vested in defendants 1 to 5, and they became the kanomdars, and consequently, they are protected from eviction under the Kerala Land ....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 42
... ... ... ... ..... leting title. Similarly, the principles decided in the Madras case 1965 56 I.T.R. 29, 33; A.I.R. 1965 Mad. 118 cannot be applied because the suit was not framed in such a way that two groups of persons have been impleaded to fight out their individual rights. On the contrary, the plaint shows that the reliefs claimed are of such general nature that even the assessee's rights in respect of shares including the right to exercise votes and the right to receive the dividends were sought to be jeopardised. It is common know....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 41
... ... ... ... ..... mitting criminal breach of trust with regard to both the amounts in question. It also appears from the evidence of Laxman, P.W. 6, and Joshi, P.W. 3, that when the audit party arrived the appellant Kale approached Mhaskar for the issue of a blank cash book without any indent. The evidence of Joshi-P.W. 3- also shows that Gupta had, in the presence of the appellant, asked the witness to write the accounts in the rough cash book newly issued. 'The evidence of these two witnesses has been accepted by the lower Courts as t....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 40
... ... ... ... ..... esser thickness than that of the gold bars. Not one of the so-called jewellers could produce a single receipt to prove the appellant's version that he bought the gold from them; nor did these jewellers produce the books of account of their own to support the appellant's case. The books of account of the appellant do not show any entry to prove that the appellant sent Dharam Chand Jain on 13-11-56 with that huge quantity of gold to Calcutta. 36. So even if Section 178-A of the Sea Customs Act about the burden of pro....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 39
... ... ... ... ..... erefore, hold that the family transferred the mortgage interest in trust to the charity for valuable consideration within the meaning of s. 9-A(10)(ii)(b) of the Act. It follows that the mortgage, Ex. A-1, was rightly held by the High Court not liable to be scaled down under the provisions of the Act. In the reply the learned counsel for the appellants sought to raise another plea, namely, that there was no valid transfer of the mortgage deed in favour of the charity inasmuch as the said transfer was not effected by a regi....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 38
... ... ... ... ..... ion was an adventure in the nature of trade and the Income-tax Officer had no grounds upon which he could hold that it was not. The fourth and last proposition of Mr. Mitra, therefore, does not also help him. I beg to add that it is not an exceedingly simple case and we have to give our most anxious consideration. There are different questions of law involved in it. The application of old principles to the particular facts was also considered. According to my understanding, and I think authority, it seems to me that in thi....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 37
... ... ... ... ..... of the case, we shall assume that the appellant was constructively in police custody and therefore the information contained in the first information report leading to the discovery of the dead bodies and the tangi is admissible in evidence. The entire evidence against the appellant then consists of the fact that the appellant gave information as to the place where the dead bodies were lying and as to the place where he concealed the tan,-,', the discovery of the dead bodies and the tangi in consequence of the informat....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 36
... ... ... ... ..... the appellant that s. 16(3) would not apply because the tenant had been ejected on August 22, 1956 and thereafter the sub-tenant could not claim the benefit of S. 16(3). In the present case the benefit of s. 16(3) was given to the sub-tenant not after August 22, 1956 but before that date i.e. on August 9, 1956. That order so far as it went was final and was not open to review or cancellation by the Controller who had thereafter only to fix the rent under the second part of s. 16(3). While going on with the proceeding for f....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 35
... ... ... ... ..... s evidence and the order of the High Court deprived the appellant of the benefit of the presumption. There is no force in this argument which may be raised invariably in all cases in which the powers under S. 428 are exercised. There was a serious defalcation of money. The money was received and the only question was whether it was deposited or not. Oral evidence showed that it was not. The accused insisted that the books of account should have been brought and so they were brought as a result of the order. The accused him....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 34
... ... ... ... ..... Shri Lalvani will continue to function as Custodian's Manager for these concerns in terms of s. 10 (2) (b) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 read with rule 34 of the rules made thereunder . It was submitted on behalf of the appellant that in view of these two letters it must be held that there was a final allotment of the business in favour of the appellant. We do not, however, think there is any justification for this argument. It is manifest that the terms and conditions of allotment were not finall....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 33
... ... ... ... ..... ch reference has been made is reported in 68 C.W.N. 1109 (Makhan Lal Sen v. Director of Panchayats, Government of West Bengal (A. I. R. 1963 S. C. 395). In this case the order of appointment was made by the Director of Panchayats who was the competent authority under a Government notification. But before the order was communicated to the petitioner it was recalled and cancelled. On these facts this court decided that an order to be effective must be completed and it can only be completed when it is communicated to the pers....... + More
-
1965 (5) TMI 32
... ... ... ... ..... at Chandigarh and that if he was to be required to produce the same at Amritsar, there would be no inconvenience to him and it is perhaps for this reason that the impugned notices in the present case were issued. Now the policy of the department, as suggested by Shri Nehra, is to pass orders of transfer in all pending assessments before a dealer is required to appear before another Assessing Authority. Shri Nehra, who has plainly stated that the petitioner-assessee was suspected by the department to be taking steps to evad....... + More