TMI Blog2003 (9) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er resident of the U.K. is alleged to have made a gift of $ 200,000 in favour of the assessee's daughter, Ms. Monica Oswal. The assessee had received the two drafts on behalf of his daughters in England, to save gift-tax, the amounts were credited to the accounts of the two donees. The Revenue alleges that the gifts are bogus. The amount of the gifts represents the concealed income of the assessee. The Tribunal has erred in accepting the claim of the respondent-assessee and deleting the addition. The assessee claims that these are valid gifts made by two friends. The Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact. The amount is not his concealed income. Thus, the appeals filed by the Revenue deserve to be dismissed. These are the contending claims of the parties in the three income-tax appeals filed under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Counsel for the parties have referred to the facts in I.T.A. No. 49 of 1999. These may be briefly noticed. The respondent-Mr. Jawahar Lal Oswal is the managing director of Oswal Woollen Mills Limited, Ludhiana. He filed his income-tax return for the assessment year 1994-95. He declared a total income of Rs. 7,74,210. This included income fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce on various decisions. Mr. G.C. Sharma, who appeared for the assessees in all the three cases, controverted the claim made on behalf of the Revenue. He contended that the Tribunal has recorded findings of fact. These are based on the appreciation of evidence on the record. The gifts have been held to be valid. There is no evidence that the funds for the gifts were provided by Mr. Oswal. Thus, no question of law much less than a substantial question of law arises for the consideration of this court. Consequently, the appeals filed by the Revenue deserve to be dismissed. Mr. Sharma had himself proposed the following three questions: "(i) Whether there was no evidence before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to hold that Shri O.S. Gill and Shri B.P. Bhardwaj had made gifts abroad each of $ 2,00,000 to Monica Oswal and Ruchika Oswal through their father, the respondent-assessee? (ii) Whether the assessee-respondent had discharged the onus, if any placed on him for establishing that valid gifts as aforesaid were received from abroad by his daughters through him? (iii) Assuming that the answer to any of the aforesaid two questions was against the assessee, could it be held th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years. Yet, the two have no business dealings. Mr. Gill was not even able to give the names of the ladies of the house. The two are not shown to have even exchanged a letter. Still, it is claimed that he made a gift of $ 200,000 in favour of Ms. Ruchika. It may be a tonic for the assessee. To me, it is a bitter pill. I find it difficult to swallow. It is true that sometimes a friend can do more than a blood relation. But on examination of the statement of Mr. Gill in its entirety, there appears to be nothing that may give an indication of any kind of friendship much less than a close one. Not even of a casual kind. Still further, Mr. Bhardwaj-the other donor was not even produced before the Income-tax Officer. Yet, it was claimed that the evidence on record establishes a close friendship. This evidence consists of the self-serving statement of Mr. Oswal himself. He was questioned by the Income-tax Officer on February 20, 1997. He stated that he was dealing in wool, textile, cotton, steel, oil and sugar. However, he had no branch in any foreign country except an "accreditation office in Moscow." This too "is not functioning for the last seven years." He claimed to have known b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Mr. O. S. Gill was very well off. He was drawing an annual salary of 1,20,000 sterling. Thus, he had the means to make the gift. Is it so? It is true that Mr. Gill claims to be drawing an annual salary of 1,20,000 pounds. He had come all the way from England to appear before the Income-tax Officer. However, he was specifically asked by the Assessing Officer to disclose the particulars of his bank account. He did not remember the number. He had not got a copy of the bank account nor any evidence with regard to his creditworthiness. He was asked if he could produce it. He was clearly reluctant. He had to discuss it with his accountant. Why? The reason is not difficult to imagine. Even Mr. Oswal was questioned with regard to the financial position of the donors. He knew about the business of both. However, with regard to the financial capability, his answer was-"nobody tells his capability but they are of good financial capability". He was unable to produce any evidence. As for Mr. Bhardwaj, he did not even appear. However, it appears from the record that the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, had taken up the matter with the Inland Revenue in Lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... east one of the two donees, viz., Mr. Gill, from his account. Mr. Bhardwaj had admittedly taken the money from Mr. Sharma. A person making a gift of two hundred thousand dollars by taking money from another person? Why ? Who is Mr. Sharma? Why did he give the money and get the draft prepared? There is no answer or evidence. Obviously there is more than meets the eye. There is another aspect. Mr. Oswal could have easily requested his friends to disclose their income-tax returns or bank accounts so that the financial status and the actual withdrawal of the amount for the making of gifts could have moved from the realm of conjecture to that of a semblance of certainty. He chose not to Why ? Again, there is no answer. Surely, a straightforward gift would not have required a cover of so much of secrecy. Good and generous friends would not have hesitated to give the supporting evidence. Yet, they have withheld it. Truth is violated not only by falsehood but also by silence. These cases are an instance. After consideration of the evidence on record, it is difficult to uphold the claim of the assessee that the two gifts had been made bona fide by the two donors as alleged by him. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . He referred to the decisions of the apex court in Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar [1999] 3 SCC 722 and Hari Singh v. Kanhaiya Lal [1999] 7 SCC 288. He also relied upon the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Deputy CIT v. Marudhar Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [2000] 245 ITR 138 to contend that the principles governing a second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall also apply to an appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In these cases, it has been held that in view of the provisions of section 100, the High Court cannot substitute its own opinion for that of the court. The jurisdiction of the court is limited to "the extent conferred by the Legislature". Thus, the High Court can interfere in an appeal under section 260A only when there is a substantial question of law. Indisputably, the court can interfere when the finding is perverse. Or in a case where there is no evidence to support a finding. What is the position in the present case? On an examination of the case, it appears that there is no evidence on the file to show that- (i) The two donors had actually got $ 200,000 each on March 22, 1994, in their bank accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... device. The assessee has not discharged the onus. Thus, questions Nos. (i) and (ii) as noticed above are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Reg: (iii) Mr. Sharma contended that even if the gifts are disbelieved, there is no evidence to show that the money had been provided by Mr. Oswal. Thus, it is not the assessee's concealed income. Consequently, it could not have added to his taxable income. Is it so? Admittedly, the amount involved is $ 400,000. There is no evidence to show that the alleged donors had so much money. In this situation, the question that arises is-Who could have provided the funds? A stranger would have no reason to part with this money. It was Mr. Sharma's claim that Mr. Oswal was running business worth Rs. 2,000 crores. In this situation, the inference is obvious. Mr. Sharma is right in contending that the onus is on the Revenue. It is also correct that the court cannot proceed on surmises and suspicions. However, one cannot lose sight of the fact that dark deeds are performed under the cover of darkness. Direct evidence can never be available for everything. Sometimes, the facts speak loud and clear. Very often the courts ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding the deletion of the two foreign gifts of two lakhs US $ each received by the assessee on behalf of his daughters as on substantive basis and simultaneously deleting the addition made on protective basis in the hands of his daughters, Monica Oswal and Ruchika Oswal, because the financial capability of the donors have not been proved at any stage, either at the assessment stage or at the appellate stage?" The salient facts of the case in brief are: That two gifts amounting to Rs. 2 lakhs dollars each were received in the United Kingdom by Mr. J.L. Oswal on behalf of his daughters through account payee drafts, one from Mr. B.P. Bhardwaj and the other from Mr. O.S. Gill, both residing in the U.K. These drafts were credited in the bank accounts of the daughters in India. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to prove the creditworthiness and financial capacity of the donors and also carried out extensive enquiries through the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, who approached the Inland Revenue in the U.K. The assessee on his part having been asked by the Assessing Officer to produce the donors, produced Mr. O.S. Gill for examination and his statem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nging any contrary evidence reached the conclusion based on no evidence that since the financial capacity of the donors had not been proved, it could be presumed that Mr. Jawahar Lal Oswal had introduced his own concealed income in the garb of the gifts in the name of his daughters. The Assessing Officer did not bring on record any evidence to show why the evidence gathered by the Central Board of Direct form the Inland Revenue in the U.K. could not be accepted as clinching the issue of genuineness of the gifts especially when the final report after exchange of correspondence between the two authorities had been received with reference to the specific queries raised by the Revenue to test the genuineness of the gifts. In this connection the relevant correspondence between the Central Board of Direct Taxes and the Inland Revenue, U.K. may be reproduced: "I. Letter No. 504/27/95-From FTD-CBDT (Delhi) dated 7th October, 1995 to U.K. Inland Revenue Authority-with its enclosure: The Indian income-tax authorities are enquiring into the genuineness of certain gifts received by Ms. Ruchika Oswal and Ms. Monica Oswal, daughters of Mr. J.L. Oswal of Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd., Ludhiana, Pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll commodities mostly in computers and electronics and he had also obtained drafts from the bank in London where he was residing close by to O. S. Gill. The Tribunal was of the opinion that the burden placed on the assessee, if any, to prove the financial capacity of the donors was sufficiently discharged observing further that in the case of non-residents the burden was lighter because it was impracticable, rather impossible for the resident assessee to require a donor residing abroad to give out all information regarding his wealth and financial capacity. The assessee could not be asked to lead an evidence which was impossible. Further, it was a case where the identity and credibility of the donors had been fully established by the Inland Revenue, U.K. at the behest of the Central Board of Direct Taxes and nothing more was required to be done in that behalf. Mr. R.P. Sawhney, counsel for the Revenue, urged that it was a fit case for the High Court to interfere with the decision of the Tribunal by admitting/allowing the appeals as the substantial question raised by the Revenue did arise. For this he relied, inter alia, on the decisions reported as CIT v. Indian Woollen Textiles ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the court that payment of excise duty was a condition precedent to the removal of the liquor from the distillery and the purchase was on account of the purchaser. Hence, the excise duty, according to normal practice, should have been reflected in the assessee's bill. Therefore, the court held that the excise duty paid by the purchaser was part of the consideration for sale and was includible in the turnover of the appellant. The facts of this case have hardly any bearing on the facts of the case under consideration. Apart, there is no evidence that the tax has been avoided by adopting any legal device. Here, the case is not of avoidance of any tax but centres on the question whether any tax is leviable on the amounts gifted. There is no evidence that the money gifted emanated from Mr. Jawahar Lal Oswal. If there was any evidence to hold that the gifts emanated from Mr. J.L. Oswal that will straightaway lead to the conclusion that it was his taxable income, but undisclosed. But, there is no evidence, whatsoever, in this case to support the allegations of the income-tax authorities. Mr. G.C. Sharma, counsel for the respondents, has urged at the first instance that the object of i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er considering all relevant evidence, even if the High Court were to reach a different conclusion on the same facts. In support of his submission, he placed great reliance on the observations of the apex court in the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349. He said that this decision supported his submission on the facts also in so far as the question of taxability of the gifted amounts in the hands of Mr. J.L. Oswal was to be adjudicated upon. Without prejudice to the pleadings as stated above, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the question of law formulated by the appellant was wholly defective and could not form the basis of real issues involved. In the present case, the evidence adduced by the parties has already been appraised by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Thereafter, the evidence has been reappraised by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Thus, it cannot be said that the findings of the courts below were perverse or that the findings are based on inadmissible evidence. The present appeals are absolutely covered by the decisions of the hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Cynamid India Ltd. [1999] 237 ITR 585 and Hari Singh v. Kanhai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. Such finding of fact can only be asserted before the High Court if there is no evidence to support it or any vital evidence has been ignored by the Tribunal in reaching the conclusion. The question of law could be formulated only on the basis of "no evidence". Reaching a conclusion after considering the pros and cons of evidence cannot be assailed even if the High Court could have reached a different conclusion after considering the same material. 4. In this case, all the evidence considered by the Tribunal has been placed before the court. This can again be seen as per chart submitted. The Tribunal has also considered the question of onus and held that the Revenue failed to discharge it as regards the allegation that the gifted money was provided by Mr. J.L. Oswal. 5. Whatsoever be the decision regarding the genuineness of the gifts received by the two daughters, it cannot provide any basis for holding that the gifted moneys were provided by the father. It would be as bad to say that they were provided by their mother or brother or anybody else. There is absolutely no evidence, even an iota of evidence to reach such a conclusion. The Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act, 1961, and the amount gifted to the daughters as their income under section 68 of the Act. I have examined the provisions of sections 69A and 68. In my view, section 69A can only be applied after it has been found that the assessee is the owner of a certain amount of money and he cannot explain how he became the owner thereof. It has already been held that there is no evidence to support that he was the owner of the gifted amounts. Section 69A of the Act is, therefore, clearly inapplicable. Turning to section 68 of the Act, as applied in the cases of the two daughters by the Assessing Officer, the same would also be inapplicable as it is nobody's case that the daughters obtained loans from any party and credited the amounts in their account books. Indeed the Assessing Officer, made a protective assessment in the case of the two daughters and did not go into the question of the genuineness of the amounts received by them in their own right and bring the sole beneficiary thereof. I agree that a protective assessment was not permissible in their cases as they never admitted gifts to be their income in their returns. In any event, as the allegation of the Revenue that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Lal Oswal (respondent in I.T.A. No. 49 of 1999) is the father of the respondents in the remaining two appeals, namely, Miss Monica Oswal and Miss Ruchika Oswal. Two gifts of $ 2,00,000 each were received by Jawahar Lal Oswal in the United Kingdom on behalf of his daughters through account payee draft. One of the gifts was given by Shri B.P. Bhardawaj and the other was given by Shri O.S. Gill. These drafts were credited in the bank accounts of Miss Monica Oswal and Miss Ruchika Oswal in India. In the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1994-95, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee, namely, Jawahar Lal Oswal to prove the creditworthiness and financial capacity of the donors. He also carried out extensive enquiries through the Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, who approached the Inland Revenue in the United Kingdom. The assesseeJawahar Lal Oswal produced Shri O.S. Gill for examination and his statement was recorded by the Assessing Officer. However, the other donor, namely, Shri B.P. Bhardawaj, was not produced before the Assessing Officer. After considering the material produced before him, the Assessing Officer framed the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 69A of the Act was justified, Ashutosh Mohunta J., held that the finding recorded by the Tribunal on the genuineness of the gifts made by Shri O.S. Gill and Shri B.P. Bhardawaj was a pure finding of fact and the Assessing Officer gravely erred in applying section 69A of the Act for the purpose of assessing the income of Jawahar Lal Oswal. The relevant portions of the opinions expressed by the two hon'ble judges are reproduced below: "Jawahar Lal Gupta J.-Section 260A provides for appeal to the High Court. The appeal lies when the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. The aggrieved party has to precisely state the question. When the court is satisfied about the question posed, it can proceed to formulate the precise issue and hear the parties. Mr. Sharma pointed out that the scope of the appeal is limited. He referred to the decisions of the apex court in Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar [1999] 3 SCC 722 and Hari Singh v. Kanhaiya Lal [1999] 7 SCC 288. He also relied upon the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Deputy CIT v. Marudhar Hotels (P.) Ltd. [2000] 245 ITR 138 to contend that the principle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000 to him. Thus, the finding of the Tribunal was upheld. This decision does not support the case of the assessee in any manner whatsoever. In fact, it supports the Revenue. In the present case, as already noticed, the source of money has not been established. The donors were strangers. They had no reason to part with even a penny. In view of the above, it is clear that the gifts are not genuine. The assessee and the two donors are not shown to have exchanged even one letter in ten to twelve years. There is not even a suggestion that the two friends had spoken to each other ten times in ten years. The assessee only knows them well enough to take but not to give. Self-interest talks in all sorts of tongues and plays all sorts of roles. The indifference is indicative of the truth. Friendship is only a facade. Not a reality. The gifts are only a device, the assessee has not discharged the onus. Thus, questions Nos. (i) and (ii) as noticed above are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Mr. Sharma contended that even if the gifts are disbelieved, there is no evidence to show that the money had been provided by Mr. Oswal. Thus, it is not the assessee's co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of protecting the financial interest of the State and the public at large. For no other consideration. In doing so, it has committed no error or illegality. Ashutosh Mohunta J.-After going through the entire record, it is clear that the Tribunal has considered all the evidence on record. It has not ignored any relevant piece of evidence. After considering all the arguments and submissions made before it by the parties, it has recorded pure findings of fact. Indeed, so far as the amount of gift received from Mr. O.S. Gill goes, there are concurrent findings of the first appellate authority, i.e., the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), and the second appellate authority, i.e., the Tribunal. Even in respect of the amount of gift received from Mr. Bhardawaj, the Tribunal has discussed the issue threadbare after considering all the evidence on record, including the statements of the donors, the documents in support of the gifts through bank drafts drawn from banks in the U.K. identity, creditworthiness and financial capacity and report of the Inland Revenue in the U.K. In any event, the view taken by the Tribunal is plausible and reasonable, based on relevant materials. There is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing the gifts of $ 2,00,000 each by Shri O.S. Gill and Shri B.P. Bhardawaj in favour of his daughters was rightly declared as a sham transaction by the Assessing Officer and the Tribunal gravely erred in interfering with the finding recorded by the Assessing Officer. Shri Sawhney relied on the judgments in CIT v. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) and argued that in such case, the court should test the veracity of the evidence on the touch-stone of human probabilities for deciding whether or not the gift was genuine. He then referred to CIT v. Smt. Durgawati Singh [1998] 234 ITR 249 (All) and argued that the Assessing Officer did not commit any illegality by making protective assessment in the hands of Miss Ruchika Oswal and Miss Monica Oswal. In the end, he submitted that the question framed by the Revenue is a substantial question of law which merits consideration by this court. Shri G.C. Sharma, learned senior counsel for the assessees, vehemently argued that the finding recorded by the Tribunal on the genuineness of the gifts made by Shri O.S. Gill and Shri B.P. Bhardawaj to the two daughters of Jawahar Lal Oswal is es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the High Court and such appeal under this sub-section shall be- (a) filed within one hundred and twenty days from the date on which the order appealed against is received by the assessee or the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner;... (c) in the form of a memorandum of appeal precisely stating therein the substantial question of law involved. (3) Where the High Court is satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved in any case, it shall formulate that question. (4) The appeal shall be heard only on the question so formulated, and the respondents shall, at the hearing of the appeal, be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such question: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that the case involves such question. (5) The High Court shall decide the question of law so formulated and deliver such judgment thereon containing the grounds on which such decision is founded and may award such cost as it deems fit. (6) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arlier formulated by it. The existence of a 'substantial question of law' is thus, the sine qua non for the exercise of the jurisdiction under the amended provisions of section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure." In Ram Prasad Rajak v. Nand Kumar and Bros. [1998] 6 SCC 748, the Supreme Court held: "Unless there was a substantial question of law, the High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the second appeal and consider the merits. It has been held by this court in Panchugopal Barua v. Umesh Chandra Goswami [1997] 4 SCC 713 and Kshitish Chandra Purkait v. Santosh Kumar Purkait [1997] 5 SCC 438 that existence of a substantial question of law is sine qua non for the exercise of jurisdiction under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In both the aforesaid cases, one of us (Dr. Anand J.) was a party to the Bench and in the former, he spoke for the Bench." In Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v." Savitribai Sopan Gujar [1999] 3 SCC 722, their Lordships of the Supreme Court lamented that the High Courts were deciding second appeals without formulating substantial questions of law and observed: "It is not within the domain of the High Court to investigate the grounds on which the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt. Prior to the amendment the interference could have been where an order was contrary to law or some usage having the force of law. But now it can only be if any substantial question of law arises. The words 'substantial question of law' brought in have significance and are not superfluous. So now interference cannot be only because the order is contrary to law, but when the disputed issues raise a substantial question of law. Creation of powers or limiting such powers in the appellate authorities is always a decision based on public policy expressed in the maxim interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium. This policy brings to finality some issues or a litigation at some point of time. If no appeal is provided, the original order becomes final. Thus it is open for the Legislature to bring finality to the adjudication on question of facts up to the stage of first appeal and limit the second appeal to question of law or to the substantial question of law or to such other limitation which the Legislature deems fit and proper." In Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari [2001] 251 ITR 84, their Lordships of the Supreme Court referred to the report of the Select Committee and the State ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raised in the case is substantial: 'The proper test for determining whether a question of law raised in the case is substantial would, in our opinion, be whether it is of general public importance or whether it directly and substantially affects the rights of the parties and if so whether it is either an open question in the sense that it is not finally settled by this court or by the Privy Council or by the Federal Court or is not free from difficulty or calls for discussion of alternative views. If the question is settled by the highest court or the general principles to be applied in determining the question are well settled and there is a mere question of applying those principles or that the plea raised is palpably absurd the question would not be a substantial question of law.'... A point of law which admits of no two opinions may be a proposition of law but cannot be a substantial question of law. To be 'substantial', a question of law must be debatable, not previously settled by law of the land or a binding precedent, and must have a material bearing on the decision of the case, if answered either way, in so far as the rights of the parties before it are concerned. To ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded by the Assessing Officer or the first appellate authority or the Tribunal cannot be disturbed by the High Court in exercise of powers under section 260A of the Act unless such finding is perverse or is such which no person of reasonable prudence could arrive at in the given facts of the case. In the present case, the two judges constituting the Bench expressed divergent opinions on the genuineness and validity of the gifts made by Shri O.S. Gill and Shri B.P. Bhardawaj in favour of Miss Ruchika Oswal and Miss Monica Oswal, respectively. One of them Jawahar Lal Gupta J., held that the gifts were not genuine. He further held that the Assessing Officer had rightly treated the amount of gifts received from Shri O.S. Gill and Shri B.P. Bhardawaj as the income of the assessee. The other judge (Ashutosh Mohunta J.) held that the finding recorded by the Tribunal on both the issues was correct. It is, thus, clear that the hon'ble judges constituting the Bench disagreed on the issue of maintainability of the appeals. Therefore, by applying the ratio of the judgment of the Full Bench of the Madras High Court in Rimmalapudi Subba Raa v. Naany Veeraju, AIR 1951 Mad 969 which was approve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
