Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 1980

293 judgments, newest first — showing 201–293.

JUTE INVESTMENT CO. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WEST BENGAL, CALCUTTA

1979 INSC 20110 October 1979Dismissed

Jute Investment Co. Ltd., a trader in gunny bags, entered into four purchase and four sale contracts with the same party, settling the transactions by transferring pucca delivery orders without any physical delivery of the bags, resulting in a loss of Rs. 2.25 lakh which it claimed as an ordinary business loss. The Inc

RELIANCE JUTE & INDUSTRIES LTD.versusC.I.T., WEST BENGAL, CALCUTTA

1979 INSC 20210 October 1979Dismissed

Reliance Jute & Industries Ltd. claimed that an unabsorbed business loss of Rs 15,50,189 from the assessment year 1950‑51 could be carried forward and set off against its business income for the assessment year 1960‑61. The Income‑Tax Officer rejected the claim, citing the 1957 amendment to section 24(2)(iii) of the In

PHUL SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1979 INSC 17610 September 1979Case Partly allowed

Phul Singh, a 22‑year‑old, was convicted of raping his cousin's wife and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment by the Sessions Court, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal before the Supreme Court, the appellant argued his youth, lack of prior convictions, and the forgiveness of the victim's family

INDERJEETversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

1979 INSC 14910 August 1979Dismissed

Inderjeet filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the constitutionality of Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, which imposes absolute liability and a mandatory minimum six‑month imprisonment for anyone found guilty of selling adulterated food, irrespective of mens rea.

MOHAMMAD YOUSUF RATHERversusTHE STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND ORS.

1979 INSC 14810 August 1979Case Allowed

The petitioner, Mohammad Yousuf Rather, was detained under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. He challenged the detention on the ground that the annexed grounds were vague and irrelevant, thereby violating his constitutional right under Article 22(5) to be informed of the grounds and to make a representation.

SULTAN AHMD. OWASIversusMOHD. OSMAN SHAHEED AND ORS.

1980 INSC 7210 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Two election petitions were filed by defeated candidates alleging that the elected candidate, Sultan Ahmad Owasi, indulged in corrupt practice by delivering speeches that promoted religious hatred. The appellant denied making any such speeches and sought to prove an alibi, claiming he was in Adoni at the relevant times

PARASRAM HARNAND RAOversusSHANTI PRASAD NARINDER KUMAR JAIN & ANR.

1980 INSC 7310 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord (appellant) had a lease with Laxmi Bank, which was declared the real tenant in a 1948 suit. After the bank was wound up, the Official Liquidator sold the tenancy rights to respondent No.1, who took possession in February 1961. The landlord obtained a decree for eviction of the bank on 31 July 1961, and res

R. R. ENGINEERING CO.versusZILA PARISHAD, BAREILLY & ANR.

1980 INSC 4310 March 1980Dismissed

R.R. Engineering Co., a partnership engaged in manufacturing, challenged the "Circumstances and Property Tax" levied by the Zila Parishad of Bareilly and by a Town Area Committee in Kuraoli, arguing that the tax was in substance a tax on income or professions and therefore exceeded the constitutional ceiling of Rs.250

NIRANJAN SINGH & ANR.versusPRABHAKAR RAJARAM KHAROTE & ORS.

1980 INSC 4410 March 1980Disposed off

The petitioner, a complainant, alleged that police officers abducted and murdered his brother. A private complaint led to an inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C., after which non‑bailable warrants were issued. The accused police applied for bail; the Sessions Court granted bail with conditions, and the High Court added fu

SHIV SHANKER DAL MILLS ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ETC.

1979 INSC 2339 November 1979Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a series of appeals and writ petitions filed by traders who had paid market fees at a 3% rate under Haryana Act No. 32 of 1977, which was later held ultra vires for exceeding the authorized 2% rate. The Court examined whether the market committees were liable to refund the excess collection

BASELIUS MAR THOMA MATHEWS & ORS.versusPAULOSE MAR ATHANASIUS &. ORS.

1979 INSC 1479 August 1979Appeal(s) allowed

A large number of suits involving a religious community in Kerala were pending in various courts. The High Court and the State Government selected eight significant suits and created an Additional District Court to try them. After evidence was recorded, an application under Section 24(1)(b) of the Code of Civil Procedu

TUMATI VENKAISH ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1980 INSC 1169 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (as amended in 1977) on the ground that, after the Parliament enacted the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 under Article 252, the State law became void for being outside the legislature's c

AMBIKA PRASAD MISHRA ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 1179 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, which imposes land‑holding ceilings and provides for surplus land surrender, consolidation, and related restrictions. Petitioners challenged various provisions on grounds of violation of Article

SETH NAND LAL & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1189 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 and its subsequent amendments, focusing on the artificial definition of "family" and the double standard for fixing land‑holding ceilings under sections 4(1), 4(3), 7, 8, 9 and 11, alleged to breach Article 14. It held that the Act,

SASANKA SEKHAR MAITY & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1199 May 1980Dismissed

The petitioners, raiyats in West Bengal, challenged the constitutionality of Chapter IIB of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 as amended in 1971 and 1972, alleging that the ceiling on agricultural holdings, the definition of "family", and related provisions violated Articles 14, 19(1)(f) and 31(2) of the Constitut

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAM RATAN

1980 INSC 1219 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Ratan, a Forest Guard in Madhya Pradesh, was charged with misconduct and, after a departmental inquiry, was served a second show‑cause notice under Article 311(2) of the Constitution (pre‑1976) and Rule 15(4)(i)(b) of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services Rules, 1966, proposing a major penalty of removal from service.

NISHI MAGHU ETC. ETCversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS.

1980 INSC 1229 May 1980Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the selection process for admission to the Government Medical College, Jammu for 1979‑80, where the State had reserved seats for various categories including "rectification of regional imbalance", areas adjoining the line of control, bad pockets, social castes, wards of medical staff and stud

SUPERINTENDENCE COMPANY OF INDIA (P) LTD.versusKRISHAN MURGAI

1980 INSC 1249 May 1980Dismissed

The Superintendence Company employed the respondent as its New Delhi branch manager and inserted a clause prohibiting him from joining a competitor or starting a similar business for two years after he "leaves" the company. The company terminated his employment and he started a competing business. The company sued for

RAGHBLR SINGH GILLversusGURCHARAN SINGH TOHRA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1279 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by independent candidate Raghbir Singh Gill challenging the setting aside of his election to the Council of States on grounds of tampered postal ballot papers. The High Court had found that four postal ballots, originally cast for Akali candidate Gurcharan Singh Tohra, were altered

KASTORI LAL LAKSHMI REDDYversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & ANOTHER

1980 INSC 1259 May 1980Dismissed

The State of Jammu & Kashmir, seeking to promote industrialisation, allocated 11.85 lakh resin‑tapping blazes in inaccessible forest areas to a private firm (the second respondent) for a ten‑year period, requiring the firm to set up a resin processing plant in the State. The petitioners challenged the order under Artic

EMPIRE JUTE CO. LID.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1980 INSC 1269 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Empire Jute Co., a member of the Indian Jute Mills Association, purchased loom‑hours from four other mills under a quinquennial working‑time agreement that limited weekly loom operation. The company claimed Rs 2,03,255 as a revenue expense deductible under section 10(2)(xv) of the Income‑Tax Act, arguing that the payme

HARI DATT KAINTHLA & ANR.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.

1980 INSC 709 April 1980Dismissed

The appellants, junior subordinate judges in Himachal Pradesh, challenged the promotions of three officers to District/Additional District & Sessions Judge (DSJ/ADSJ) and two officers to a selection‑grade subordinate judge post, arguing that such promotions are selection posts that must be based solely on merit and not

GURBAKSH SINGH SIBBIA ETC .versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1980 INSC 689 April 1980Case Partly allowed

Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia, a former minister, faced allegations of political corruption and applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, fearing arrest for non‑bailable offences. The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the applications, imposing a series of restrictive conditions and rejecting blanket b

MAHALAXMI SUGAR MILLS CO. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI, NEW DELHI

1980 INSC 699 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Ltd., a sugar manufacturer, claimed deductions for interest paid on arrears of sugarcane cess under the U.P. Sugarcane Cess Act, 1956, in its income‑tax returns for the assessment years 1959‑60, 1960‑61 and 1961‑62. The Income‑Tax Officer disallowed the claims, but the Appellate Assistant Commis

STATE OF GUJARATversusGUJARAT REVENUE TRIBUNAL & ORS.

1979 INSC 1458 August 1979Dismissed

The case concerned vast hilly tracts of land that produced natural grass and were formerly part of taluqdar and inamdar estates. After the Bombay Taluqdari Tenure Abolition Act, 1949 and the Bombay Personal Inams Abolition Act, 1952 came into force, the State of Gujarat claimed that these lands were "waste" or "unculti

KATHIAWAR INDUSTRIES LTD.versusJAFFRABAD MUNICIPALITY

1979 INSC 1468 August 1979Dismissed

Kathiawar Industries Ltd operated a salt manufacturing plant where raw (uncrushed) salt was produced outside Jaffrabad Municipality and then transported into the municipality's octroi limits for crushing before export. The municipality demanded octroi on the salt, asserting that the salt, once brought into the area for

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusATA MOHD.

1980 INSC 1138 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Ata Mohd applied for a lease of plot 227 adjoining a public road in Gorakhpur. The Municipal Board granted the lease in 1945, which was later approved by the District Magistrate and a KABULIYAT was executed. The State of Uttar Pradesh later cancelled the lease, claiming the land was Nazrul (state) land and that the mun

MANIK CHAND AND ANR.versusRAMACHANDRA SON OF CHAWRIRAJ

1980 INSC 1148 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, two minors, entered into an agreement through their mother and natural guardian to purchase a house for Rs 11,000, paying Rs 1,000 as earnest money. The seller failed to perform, and the minors sued for specific performance. The trial court decreed in their favour, but the High Court dismissed the suit

DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1980 INSC 1158 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co., manufactured "rayon tyre cord fabric" and claimed exemption from sales tax under Item 18 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, which referenced "rayon fabrics" as defined in the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 and Item 22 of the Central Exc

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALAversusPIARA SINGH

1980 INSC 1118 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Piara Singh, a gold smuggler, was caught crossing the India‑Pakistan border in 1958 and Rs 65,500 in currency notes used to purchase gold abroad were confiscated by customs. He claimed that the confiscated amount was a loss incurred in his smuggling business and sought a deduction under section 10(1) of the Income‑Tax

FAZLUNBIversusK. KHADER V ALI AND ANR.

1980 INSC 1128 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Fazlunbi, a Muslim woman, was deserted by her husband K. Khader Vali who obtained a divorce and paid a meager mahar of Rs.500 and iddat maintenance of Rs.750, after which the magistrate cancelled the earlier maintenance order under Section 125 CrPC. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether such payment satisfied

V.C. SHUKLAversusSTATE THROUGH C.B.I.

1979 INSC 2627 December 1979Dismissed

V.C. Shukla was charged under the Special Courts Act, 1979 and the Special Judge ordered that a charge be framed against him. The State raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the order was merely an interlocutory one and that, under section 11(1) of the Act (which contains a non‑obstante clause), no appeal lies f

DHANI RAM GUPTA & ORS.versusLALA SRI RAM & ANR.

1979 INSC 2637 December 1979Appeal(s) allowed

Rattan Lal sold land to Sri Ram and later agreed to reconvey it for a price. Sri Ram sued for specific performance and obtained a decree, which Rattan Lal assigned to Dhani Ram Gupta and another. The assignees filed an execution application under Order XXI‑Rule 16, giving notice to both the judgment‑debtor and the orig

DADAJI ALIAS DINAversusSUKHDEOBABU & ORS.

1979 INSC 2327 November 1979Dismissed

In the 1978 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly election for the Armori constituency (reserved for Scheduled Tribes), the appellant Dadaji was declared elected, claiming membership in the "Mana" community. The unsuccessful candidate challenged the election, arguing that Dadaji did not belong to any Scheduled Tribe listed

BANK OF TRAVANCOREversusGOODLAND PLANTATIONS (P) LTD. N OVEMBE~ 7, 1979

1979 INSC 2317 November 1979Appeal(s) allowed

Goodland Plantations Ltd. subscribed to a monthly chitty run by Orient Bank and paid four instalments, winning the prize. Before the prize could be paid, the Central Government imposed a moratorium on Orient Bank under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, causing the chitty to be deemed terminated under the Travancore Chi

EBRAHIM SULAIMAN SAITversusM. C. MUHAMMAD AND ANR.

1978 INSC 2267 November 1978Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ebrahim Sulaiman Sait, was elected to the Lok Sabha from Manjeri, Kerala, but his election was declared void by the Kerala High Court on the ground that a speech he made during the campaign promoted religious enmity, violating Section 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The appellant c

H. S. VERMA & ORS.versusSECRETARY, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING & TRANSPORT AND ORS. ETC., ETC.

1979 INSC 1437 August 1979Disposed off

The case concerned 51 engineers appointed by interview (UPSC) to the Ministry of Shipping & Transport (Roads Wing) who claimed they were regular cadre officers, while officers appointed by competitive examination argued that the interview appointees were ex‑cadre and should not enjoy seniority or promotion rights. The

N. MADHAVANversusSTATE OF KERALA

1979 INSC 1447 August 1979Appeal(s) allowed

N. Madhavan was charged under Section 302 IPC for killing a person with his licensed 12‑bore gun. He successfully pleaded self‑defence, invoking Section 96 IPC, and the Sessions Judge acquitted him. However, the judge ordered the gun to be confiscated to the Government without giving any reasons or hearing the accused.

RAJ KANTAversusFINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND ANR.

1980 INSC 1107 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Four tenants of agricultural land owned by Raj Kanta applied to purchase the land under Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 and paid the first instalment. They failed to pay the rent for Kharif 1961, which was due on 15 January 1962, and offered no sufficient cause. The landowner sought ejectmen

JAMNADAS DHARAMDASversusDR. J. JOSEPH FERREIRA AND ANR.

1980 INSC 1077 May 1980Dismissed

The plaintiff, a landlord, leased two plots of land to the defendant, who was permitted to erect buildings. The defendant built a three‑storey structure on one plot but repeatedly defaulted on rent and tax payments, leading to forfeiture of the lease. The landlord sued for ejectment of both the land and the superstruct

SHALIMAR ROPE WORKS LTD.versusABDUL HUSSAIN H. M. HASAN BHAI RASSIWALA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 1087 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent filed a suit for damages against Shalimar Rope Works Ltd. and served summons at the company's registered office in Calcutta, handing it to an office assistant, Navlakha, who was not a secretary, director, or principal officer. The company remained unaware of the summons and the subsequent ex‑parte decree

RAM SWAROOP RAIversusLILAVATHI

1980 INSC 1097 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The landlady purchased shop No. 66 in Jhansi in 1969 and let the ground floor to the tenant in 1970, claiming the building was a "new construction" erected in 1965. In 1975 she filed an eviction suit invoking the exemption under Section 2(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Rent Control Act, which shields landlords from the Act fo

TARA PRASAD SINGH ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1980 INSC 1067 May 1980Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined a group of writ petitions challenging the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Amendment Act, 1976, which terminated existing coal mining leases and barred private persons from carrying out coal mining operations. The petitioners, lessees of coal and composite (coal‑fireclay) mines, argued that the a

MAHANT PARICHCHAN DASversusTHE BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS & ORS.

1979 INSC 2296 November 1979Dismissed

Mahant Parichchan Das sued to declare that the temples and associated lands were his personal property and not subject to the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1951. The respondents, the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts and others, contended that the properties formed a Hindu religious trust of public nature. The

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusPT. CHANDRA BHUSHAN MISRA

1979 INSC 2306 November 1979Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed a decision of the Allahabad High Court which had ordered a refund of court fees under Section 13 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 after a case was remanded to the lower court under Order XI Rule 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as amended by the High Court. The central question was

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALAversusAMBAT ECHUKUTTY MENON

1979 INSC 1736 September 1979Dismissed

The assessee, a Hindu undivided family owning agricultural land in Kerala, sold about 367 spontaneously grown trees, retaining the stumps and roots, under an agreement that prohibited cutting the sprouts. The Income‑Tax Officer treated the entire consideration of Rs 1,75,000 as taxable income, while the assessee argued

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusVEERAPPRA SABOJI AND ANR.

1979 INSC 1746 September 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a civil judge appointed on probation under the Bombay Judicial Service Recruitment Rules, 1956, continued in an officiating capacity after his two‑year probation expired and was terminated by a simple one‑month notice. He claimed he had been deemed confirmed under Rule 4(2)(iv) and that the termination

R. NARAYANANversusS. SEMMALAI AND ORS.

1979 INSC 1726 September 1979Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1977 Tamil Nadu Assembly election for the Taramangalam constituency, R. Narayanan was declared elected by a narrow margin of about 19 votes. S. Semmalai filed an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 alleging counting irregularities and seeking a recount and declaration of his own el

SUSHIL CHOWDHARY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1979 INSC 1756 September 1979Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by special leave concerning the convictions of Munni Marandi and Babua Marandi for offences under Section 149 read with Section 326 of the IPC. Munni, an adult, was found to have participated in a crowd that chased the deceased and was sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonmen

SHAH GUMMAN MALversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1980 INSC 206 February 1980

Gumman Mal was found to be in possession of 28 gold biscuits with foreign markings hidden in a secret chamber of his safe. He admitted that the gold was brought from outside the country by an unknown person and that he held no permit under the Reserve Bank of India or the Gold Control Administrator. He was convicted un

DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES, U.P. AND ORS.versusDEEP CHAND AGGARWAL

1980 INSC 216 February 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The Director of Industries, U.P. advanced a loan of Rs.15,000 to Deep Chand Aggarwal for setting up a cottage industry, secured by a mortgage on his house. When Aggarwal defaulted, the State used Section 3 of the Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1965, read with the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, to trea

RAJPUT RUDA MAHA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1979 INSC 2595 December 1979Dismissed

Three accused were acquitted by a Sessions Judge for murder and related offences, but the State appealed and the Gujarat High Court convicted them. The appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court under section 2(a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970. The Supreme Court dism

COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX, BOMBAY ETC.versusSMT. KUSUMBEN D. MAHADEVIA ETC.

1979 INSC 2605 December 1979Dismissed

The assessees, a private limited investment company, claimed that the value of their shares should be determined by the profit‑earning method prepared by chartered accountants, while the Gift Tax and Wealth Tax officers used the break‑up method, resulting in a higher tax liability. The Tribunal accepted the profit‑earn

RAMESHWAR LAL SANWARMALversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ASSAM

1979 INSC 2615 December 1979Dismissed

The Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) beneficially owned shares in a private limited company, though the shares were registered in the name of its Karta. The company advanced loans to three business concerns owned by the HUF, and the Income‑Tax Officer treated those loans as "deemed dividend" under section 2(6A)(e) of the I

COMMISSIONER-OF INCOME-TAX, ANDHRA PRADESHversusT. N. ARAVINDA REDDY

1979 INSC 1985 October 1979Dismissed

The respondent, T.N. Aravinda Reddy, sold his own house and, to avoid capital gains tax, acquired the family house jointly owned with his three brothers by executing three release deeds, each for a consideration of Rs. 30,000. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether such release deeds amounted to a "purchase" of

CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTYversusKAMLAVATI AND SHRI JAI GOPAL MEHRA

1979 INSC 1715 September 1979Dismissed

Maharaj Mal, a half‑partner in a firm, gifted Rs 1,00,000 to his son and Rs 50,000 to his wife in 1957 and simultaneously admitted his son as a partner, transferring half of his share. After the donor's death in 1962 the remaining partnership shares were re‑allocated. The Revenue argued that the gifts were dutiable und

STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.versusVAGHELA DAYABHAI CHATURBHAI & ORS.

1980 INSC 425 March 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the validity of a Gujarat Government Resolution dated 28 December 1966 that discontinued public auctions for bhatha lands and instead allocated lease‑hold rights preferentially to bona‑fide agriculturists, Harijans, Adivasis, backward classes and cooperative societies. Petitioners claimed they were u

KHORSHED SHAPOOR CHENAI ETC.versusASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY

1979 INSC 2564 December 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two appeals challenging notices issued by the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty under sections 59(a) and 61 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, which sought to reopen and rectify estate duty assessments of lands acquired by the government. The Court held that the right to receive compensation for

SHYAMCHARAN SHARMAversusDHARAMDAS

1979 INSC 2574 December 1979

The landlord sought eviction of the tenant under the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, for failure to pay rent arrears. The trial court allowed the tenant to claim protection under section 12(3) after he deposited the arrears, and dismissed the eviction suit. While the appeal was pending, the tenant appli

STATE OF MAHARASIITRAversusNATWARLAL DAMODARDAS SONI

1979 INSC 2584 December 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The Anti‑Corruption Bureau raided Natwarlal Damodardas Soni's residence and seized 100 gold biscuits of foreign origin concealed in a jacket; the Customs authorities subsequently took possession. Soni, who was absent at the time, was later convicted under sections 135(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962 and the Defence

KEWAL SINGHversusLAJWANTI

1979 INSC 1974 October 1979Dismissed

The tenant Kewal Singh occupied premises under a lease when the landlord Lajwanti filed an eviction suit under the Delhi Rent Control Act invoking sections 14A(1), 14(1)(e) and 14(1)(f). She later withdrew the bonafide necessity and repair grounds, then amended the suit to re‑insert the 14(1)(e) ground. The tenant chal

ASHOK KUMAR MISHRA & ANR.versusCOLLECTOR, RAIPUR & ORS .

1979 INSC 1694 September 1979Dismissed

The Collector of Raipur published a preliminary electoral roll for the municipal elections and issued a notice under Rule 4(1) allowing claims or objections within 20 days, although Rule 4(3) prescribed a 30‑day period. Several petitioners discovered the discrepancy only in early December and filed a writ petition unde

RAMESH CHAND ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

1979 INSC 1674 September 1979Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of a transport scheme prepared by the Uttar Pradesh State Transport Undertaking under sections 68C (draft scheme) and 68D (approved scheme) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The scheme did not specify the exact number of services (buses, trips) to be provided, and the Allahabad Hi

V.K.GUPTAversusNIRMALA GUPTA

1979 INSC 1704 September 1979Hearing Adjourned

In V.K. Gupta v. Nirmala Gupta, the husband filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Delhi High Court, both the single judge and the division bench, refused to dissolve the marriage. On appeal, the Supreme Court emphasized that the court's primary role in matrimonial disputes i

MANAGEMENT OF SHRI CHALTHAN VIBHAG KHAN UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. ETC .versusB. S. BAROT MEMBER, INDUSTRIAL COURT, GUJARAT, AND ANR. ETC.

1979 INSC 1684 September 1979Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the award of dearness allowance granted to workers of five cooperative sugar factories in Gujarat. The Industrial Court had increased the graduated dearness allowance and allowed a variable dearness allowance at 125% neutralisation, which the High Court later set aside. The Court held that va

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.versusE. S. SOUNDARAJAN ETC.

1979 INSC 774 April 1979Disposed off

The case concerned railway employees classified as Commercial Clerks and Assistant Station Masters/Station Masters (ASM/SM) whose pay scales were revised under a "New Deal" in 1956, resulting in some ASM/SM receiving lower pay than Commercial Clerks. The employees claimed this constituted discrimination violating Artic

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusMOHD. Y AKUB S/0 ABDUL HAMID & ORS.

1980 INSC 404 March 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra charged three men with attempting to smuggle 43 silver ingots out of India, violating the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, the Imports and Exports (Control) Act and the Customs Act. The accused, who were the driver of a jeep, the driver of a truck and a cleaner, argued that they were unaware of

JOLLY GEORGE VERGHESE & ANR.versusTHE BANK OF COCHIN

1980 INSC 194 February 1980

The appellants, judgment‑debtors, had decrees for payment of money against the Bank of Cochin and their properties were attached with a receiver appointed. The execution court issued a warrant for their arrest and detention in civil prison under Section 51 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Order 21 Rule 37, without in

ALL SAINTS HIGH SCHOOL, HYDERABAD ETC. ETC.versusGOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 184 February 1980Remitted to Lower Court

The Supreme Court examined whether several provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Recognised Private Educational Institutions Control Act, 1975 infringed the constitutional guarantee of minority institutions under Article 30(1). The appellants, Christian minority schools, challenged sections 3(1), 3(2), 4 and 5 as they requi

RATTAN SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1979 INSC 1953 October 1979Dismissed

Rattan Singh, a heavy‑vehicle driver, was convicted under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code for causing the death of a scooterist through rash and negligent driving and was sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment. He filed a Special Leave Petition (Crl. No. 953 of 1979) before the Supreme Court, contending th

RAMDAS BHIKAJI CHAUDHARIversusSADA NAND & ORS.

1979 INSC 1963 October 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were convicted under s.16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling confectionery drops containing cool‑tar dye. The Bombay High Court acquitted them on the ground that the sample sent to the public analyst was less than the 500 g minimum required by Rule 22, relying on the earlier

PRATAP SINGHversusUNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH AND ANR.

1979 INSC 1663 September 1979Dismissed

Pratap Singh was appointed as a temporary Assistant Sub‑Inspector of Police on 2 July 1973. His services were terminated on 26 September 1977 by the Senior Superintendent of Police. He challenged the termination, arguing that Rule 12.8(1) of the Punjab Police Rules placed him on a three‑year probation, after which he s

BRIJ MOHANversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

1979 INSC 1423 August 1979Reference answered

Brij Mohan, a partner in two firms, filed his 1964-65 income tax return late in April 1968, disclosing income from one firm but concealing income from the other. The Income Tax Officer, upon discovery, imposed a penalty under Section 271(1)(c)(iii) as amended by the Finance Act 1968, which allowed a penalty up to twice

VUAYSINGH RATHOREversusMURARILAL & ORS.

1979 INSC 1413 August 1979Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a practising advocate, certified the solvency of a surety for his client in a bailable offence, violating Rule 10 of the Bar Council of India’s professional conduct rules. The Disciplinary Tribunal of the Bar Council suspended him for one month, and his appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed by the Tr

TRAVANCORE TEA CO. LTD. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 1283 June 1980Case Partly allowed

The Travancore Tea Co. Ltd., a tea plantation owning 17 motor vehicles, claimed that the vehicles were used only on private estate roads for agricultural purposes and therefore exempt from tax under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963. The State levied tax, seized a lorry and the company paid the amount under

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusVISHWANATH TUKARAM UMALE & ORS.

1979 INSC 1392 August 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra prosecuted Vishwanath Tukaram Umale and others for stealing railway tyres and tubes from a wagon in transit. The prosecution alleged that accused 1, 2, 5 and an absconding accused had removed the tyres, sold them to accused 3, who later sold some to accused 4. The trial magistrate refused to fr

ANAND NARAIN SHUKLAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1979 INSC 1402 August 1979Dismissed

Anand Narain Shukla, an Office Superintendent in the Madhya Pradesh Agriculture Department, was initially found guilty in a departmental enquiry and reverted to a lower rank. The Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed that order on technical grounds, reinstating him. Subsequently, he was suspended and a fresh enquiry on the

VISHNU AWATAR ETC.versusSHIV AUTAR AND ORS.

1980 INSC 1042 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered three Special Leave Petitions challenging the Allahabad High Court's refusal to entertain revisions under Section 115 of the CPC on the ground that Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Amendment Act, 1978 bars such revisions when the original suit is valued below Rs 20,000. The Court examined the

BHIMRAO ANNA INGAWALE AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1980 INSC 662 April 1980Disposed off

The case involved six accused who were charged with murder and rioting under sections 302, 149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code for the deaths of two brothers. A long-standing animosity existed between the families, and on the day of the incident the accused entered the victims' house, dragged them onto a narrow road a

SANTOSH MEHTAversusOM PRAKASH AND ANR.

1980 INSC 672 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a working woman tenant, paid all rent arrears to her advocate, who failed to deposit the amounts with the court or pay the landlord. The Delhi Rent Controller, relying on Section 15(7) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, struck out the tenant's defence and proceeded with the eviction. The High Court dis

INDU BHUSHAN GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1979 INSC 1381 August 1979Dismissed

The appellant, a Karta of a joint Hindu family, obtained a taccavi loan for improving a family farm and offered his half‑share in zamindari lands as security. After default, the Collector attached the hypothecated property and initiated recovery proceedings. The appellant claimed the loan was taken in his capacity as K

BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI AND ANR. ETC.versusSURJEET SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1980 INSC 1021 May 1980Dismissed

In 1978 the Delhi Bar Council added a proviso to Rule 3(j) of its Election Rules requiring advocates to submit a declaration confirming certain qualifications, failing which they would be excluded from the electoral roll. About 2,000 advocates were omitted, the electoral roll was used for the Bar Council election and t

WORKMEN OF SUDDER WORKSHOP OF JOREHAUT TEA CO. LTD.versusITS MANAGEMENT AND VICE-VERSA

1980 INSC 1031 May 1980Dismissed

In 1966 the Jorehaut Tea Co. Ltd. retrenched 23 workmen; 16 received compensation calculated under s.25F of the Industrial Disputes Act and were selected according to the 'last come, first go' rule of s.25G, while the remaining seven were dismissed out of turn. The Industrial Tribunal upheld the retrenchment of the 16

STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIRversusSANAULLAH MIR

1980 INSC 621 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent’s ancestor was an Assamidar who held a parcel of land in Srinagar until the Maharaja’s Durbar resumed it in 1894, recording it as "Khalsa" state land and paying only rent, with no compensation. Sixty years later the respondent sought compensation, prompting the State to initiate a fresh land‑acquisition

STATE OF KERALA & ORS. ETC.versusT. N. PETER & ANR. ETC.

1980 INSC 631 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala appealed against a Kerala High Court judgment that struck down Sections 34(1) and 34(2A) of the Cochin Town Planning Act as violative of Article 14. The Supreme Court examined whether the Act's differential treatment of compensation, particularly the exclusion of solatium, constituted unreasonable c

KRISHAN LALversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1980 INSC 641 April 1980Dismissed

The petitioner was convicted under Section 376 IPC for raping a girl under 16 years who was sleeping outside her house. He appealed, arguing that the victim's testimony lacked substantial corroboration. The Supreme Court held that in rape cases involving minors, the victim's testimony, when supported by circumstantial

P. S. R. SADHANANTHAMversusARUNACHALAM & AIIR.

1980 INSC 161 February 1980Dismissed

The accused, S. R. Sadhanantham, was acquitted by the Madras High Court of murder (s.302 IPC) and assault (s.148 IPC). The victim's brother, Arunachalam, filed a special leave petition under Article 136 of the Constitution, obtained leave, and the Supreme Court set aside the acquittal, restoring conviction and life sen

P. N. ESWARA IYERversusTHE REGISTRAR, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

1980 INSC 171 February 1980Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the amendment to Order XL, Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, which allows review petitions to be disposed of by circulation without oral arguments, alleging violations of Articles 14, 19, 21 and the right to a public hearing under Article 32. The Court examined whether the rule was ultra vir

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search