Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 1984

199 judgments, newest first.

STATE OF TAMIL NADU, ETC. ETC.versusL. ABU KAVUR BAI AND ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 16831 October 1983Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Tamil Nadu Stage Carriages and Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1973, which sought to nationalise stage and contract carriage services and their assets. Operators challenged the Act as violative of Articles 14, 19 and 31, alleging it was confiscatory and lack

BABAJI KONDAJL GARAD ETC.versusTHE NASIK MERCHANTS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NASIK & ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 16931 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two appeals challenging the elections to the Boards of Directors of Nasik Merchants Co‑operative Bank Ltd. and Parbhani District Co‑operative Bank Ltd. The election programmes issued by the Collectors failed to specify that two seats were reserved under Section 73B of the Maharashtra Cooperat

SHIVRAM ANAND SHIROORversusRADHABAI SHANTRAM KOWSHIK AND ANOTHER

1984 INSC 2231 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Shivram, a retired member of the armed forces, inherited a flat in 1964 that was already let to a tenant. He filed an eviction suit in 1971 on grounds of default and personal requirement. While the suit was pending, the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 was amended in 1975 to include Section

M.R. PARASHAR AND ORS.versusDR. FAROOQ ABDULLAH AND ORS.

1984 INSC 2331 January 1984Dismissed

The petition sought to hold the Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, in criminal contempt for allegedly denouncing the judiciary in statements published in the Daily Kashmir Times. The editor of the newspaper asserted the report was accurate, while the Chief Minister denied making the statements. No

KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, BANGALOREversusB. A. JAYARAM AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 2431 January 1984Dismissed

The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (K.S.R.T. Corp.) appealed against a Karnataka High Court order that dismissed its writ appeal challenging the rejection of an application to increase the number of trips on an inter‑state stage‑carriage permit. The issue centered on whether Section 57(8) of the Motor Vehic

VISHWA MITTERversusO. P. PODDAR AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13730 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Vishwa Mitter, a dealer and constituted attorney of the owners of a registered trademark for beedies, filed a criminal complaint before a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate alleging offences under Sections 78 and 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and Section 420 of the IPC against several respondents. The magistra

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, ETC.versusESCORTS LTD. & OTHERS, ETC .

1984 INSC 9630 April 1984Disposed off

The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) requisitioned the removal of certain directors of Escorts Ltd. under Sections 166 and 284 of the Companies Act, 1956, and gave notice for an extraordinary general meeting. The Bombay High Court, on a writ petition, stayed the notice, prohibiting any action on the requisitio

MANSARAMversusS. P. PATHAK AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13529 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former government telephone employee, had taken a house on lease in 1954 and continued to occupy it after retirement in 1967. Respondent S.P. Pathak applied to the House Allotment Officer for possession, alleging the appellant occupied the premises in violation of Clause 22(2) of the Central Provinces

S. KUMARversusTHE INSTITUTE OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND PARLIAMENTARY STUDIES AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13329 September 1983Dismissed

The appellant, a research officer, was charged with submitting a false bill and later with disobeying an order, leading to his dismissal from service. He filed a suit for declaration and injunction to restrain his dismissal, which was dismissed by the Subordinate Judge on the ground that his remedy lay in damages. Subs

JAI BHAGWANversusTHE MANAGEMENT OF THE AMBALA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED AND ANOTHER

1983 INSC 13429 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a clerk‑cum‑cashier of Ambala Central Co‑operative Bank, was suspended and later terminated after a customer alleged a bogus cheque. No charge‑sheet or notice to show cause was served, and the internal enquiry did not find him guilty. The Industrial Tribunal upheld the termination despite the lack of evi

ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD. ETC.versusT.C. SHRIVASTAVA & ORS.

1984 INSC 7329 March 1984Disposed off

Four quarry workers were charged with misconduct for participating in an illegal strike and related acts, and after giving written explanations they were subjected to a departmental inquiry that found them guilty. The General Manager dismissed all four under Standing Order No. 17, which the arbitrator later held requir

SHIROMANI GURUDWARA PRABHANDHAK COMMITTEE, AMRITSARversusMAHANT KIRPA RAM & ORS.

1984 INSC 7229 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A group of villagers applied to the Punjab Government to have a local religious institution declared a Sikh Gurdwara under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925. The application was referred to the Sikh Gurdwara Tribunal, which held that the institution was a Sikh Gurdwara and that the respondent was the hereditary Mahant. The

VIKLAID COAL MERCHANT, PATIALA, ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1983 INSC 16728 October 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, coal merchants, challenged a series of orders issued by the Ministry of Railways—including the addition of the abbreviation 'GX' to station codes and a Preferential Traffic Schedule under Section 27A of the Indian Railways Act—that restricted the outward booking of coal in wagon‑loads from way‑side sta

DR. P. NALLA THAMPY THERA.versusB.L. SHANKER & OTHERS

1983 INSC 16528 October 1983Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition that had been dismissed for the petitioner's failure to appear and produce evidence, despite statutory mandates for disposal within six months. The petitioner sought to delete a specific prayer, and the High Court allowed the deletion and later permitted withdrawal of a r

DR. P. NALLA THAMBY THERAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 16628 October 1983Disposed off

The petitioner, a railway commuter, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the Union of India to implement the recommendations of the Kunzru, Wanchoo and Sikri Committee reports, appoint a fact‑finding commission and improve railway safety, invoking Articles 19 and 21. The Union, through a

KABIDI VENKU SAHversusSYED ABDUL HAI AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13128 September 1983Dismissed

The appellant, a simple mortgagee who obtained a decree on a 1948 mortgage and later purchased the mortgaged property, sought to have an attachment made on 24‑September‑1964 (by the respondent creditor) raised under Order 21 Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The trial court allowed the claim, holding that the ent

ARUN KUMAR BOSEversusMOHD. FURKAN ANSARI & OTHERS

1983 INSC 13228 September 1983Dismissed

In the 1980 Bihar Legislative Assembly election, the appellant Arun Kumar Bose was declared elected by a margin of 24 votes over respondent No.1, Mohd. Furkan Ansari. The respondent filed an election petition under s.81 of the Representation of the People Act, alleging that 74 ballot papers were wrongly rejected becaus

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KANPURversusM/S. J.K. COTTON MANUFACTURERS LTD.

1984 INSC 4928 February 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether tax liabilities arising from settlements under the Taxation on Income (Investigation Commission) Act, 1947, which remained unpaid at the valuation dates, could be deducted as debts owed in computing net wealth under the Wealth‑Tax Act, 1957. The assessee companies argued that the unpa

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusNARSINGRAO GANGARAM PIMPLE

1984 INSC 20127 October 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Inspector of Police, was accused of demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs.2000 from a complainant (Rege) to suppress a case under the Bombay Prohibition Act. The prosecution proved the transaction through eyewitnesses, an ultraviolet powder test on the money and the accused's clothing, and the fact t

CHANDRIKA JHAversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1983 INSC 16427 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a political figure, was appointed Secretary of the first Board of Directors of the Vaishalli District Central Cooperative Bank under Bye‑law 29, which allowed the Registrar to nominate the Board for up to one year at a time. The Board's term was repeatedly extended by directions from the Chief Minister,

S. SIVASWAMLversusV. MALAIKANNAN AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12827 September 1983Dismissed

In the 1980 Tamil Nadu Assembly election for the Ilayangudi constituency, the appellant was declared winner by a margin of 56 votes. The first respondent filed an election petition alleging that the Returning Officer had wrongly rejected ballot papers where the voter's mark was partially in the candidate's column and p

KANPUR UNIVERSITY AND OTHERSversusSAMIR GUPTA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12927 September 1983Dismissed

The Kanpur University conducted the 1982 Combined Pre‑Medical Test using a multiple‑choice objective format and published the key‑answers along with the results. Several candidates claimed that the key‑answers for three questions (in Chemistry, Zoology and Botany) were incorrect, causing them to be denied admission to

SHAMBU NATH GOYALversusBANK OF BARODA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13027 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Shambhu Nath Goyal, a clerk of Bank of Baroda, was dismissed after a departmental enquiry in 1965 conducted by Sen Gupta, who was appointed as Enquiry Officer. Goyal challenged the dismissal, alleging bias and procedural irregularities; the dispute was deemed industrial and referred to an Industrial Tribunal, which set

SMT. BIMLA DEVI ETC.versus1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND OTHERS ETC.

1984 INSC 6827 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered two appeals filed by Bimla Devi, a landlord, seeking eviction of her tenant from the remaining portion of a house she partially occupied. The central issue was the interpretation of Explanation (iv) to Section 21(1)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Ev

SUDHIR CHANDRA SARKARversusTATA IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. AND OTHERS.

1984 INSC 6927 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a permanent uncovenanted employee of Tata Iron & Steel Co., rendered 29 years of continuous service and resigned, thereby becoming eligible for retiring gratuity under the 1937 Retiring Gratuity Rules. The company refused payment, invoking Rule 10 which purported to give it absolute discretion to pay or

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusOSWAL WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 7027 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India challenged an ex parte interim stay order and a contempt rule granted by the Calcutta High Court in a writ petition filed by Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. seeking to restrain the Union from enforcing a clause‑8B order under the Import Control Order, 1955, and to permit re‑export of a consignment of beef t

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusRAJA VASIREDDY KOMALLAVALLI KAMBA & OTHERS

1984 INSC 7127 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased had submitted a life insurance proposal for Rs.50,000 on 27‑December‑1960 and paid two cheques as the first premium, which were encashed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC). The deceased died on 12‑January‑1961 before the Divisional Manager formally accepted the proposal. The respondents claim

RAJENDRA SINGH & ORS. ETCversusSMT. USHA RANI & ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 4727 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged the election petitions filed against them on the ground that the copies served on them were not attested as true and exact copies as required by Section 81(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and therefore the petitions should be dismissed in limine under Section 86. The High Cou

THE PUNJABI UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH ETC.versusSUNDER SINGH AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 4827 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether grace marks under Punjab University Regulation Rule 27(a) or 27(b) should be granted to candidates who reappeared for failed subjects in their LL.M. examinations. The respondents, having failed certain papers, reappeared but still did not meet the passing criteria even after applying

MOTOR GENERAL TRADERS & ANR. ETC ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1983 INSC 16326 October 1983Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of clause (b) of Section 32 of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, which exempted all buildings constructed on or after 26 August 1957 from the Act's rent‑control provisions. Petitioners argued that after more than two decades the e

SADHURAM BANSALversusPULIN BEHARI SARKAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 9326 April 1984Dismissed

The dispute concerned the sale of a six‑bigha property in Duffers Lane, Howrah, which had been under the custody of an Official Receiver appointed in a 1952 suit. The appellant, Sadhu Ram Bansal, offered Rs 4 lakhs, paid Rs 1 lakh and was accepted by the Receiver, but failed to pay the balance promptly. Respondents 1‑4

EX. CAPT. K.C. ARORA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 9426 April 1984Case Allowed

During the 1962 national emergency, the Punjab Government framed the National Emergency (Concessions) Rules, 1965, granting ex‑military personnel benefits such as seniority when they joined civil service. The petitioners, former army officers appointed as Assistant Engineers in Haryana, claimed seniority based on their

RAMESH KUMARversusRAM KUMAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 9526 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Ramesh Kumar and Ram Kumar were convicted by a Sessions Judge under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, relying on a claim that Ram Kumar had gifted three acres of land to the victim's widow as compensatio

BIHARI CHOWDHARY & ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 6726 March 1984Dismissed

Bihari Chowdhary and another filed a suit for declaration of title and possession of immovable property against the State of Bihar. Before filing, they served a notice under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code on 18‑Feb‑1969 but instituted the suit on 2‑Apr‑1969, i.e., before the two‑month statutory period prescribe

HARI RAMversusHIRA SINGH & ORS.

1983 INSC 18625 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

In the Metropolitan Council election from the Narela constituency, Hari Ram was declared elected with 12,369 votes, defeating Hira Singh who secured 12,131 votes. Hira Singh filed an election petition and, at the interlocutory stage, sought an order directing the Returning Officer to produce the marked electoral rolls

PASHUPATI NATH SUKUL & OTHERS.versusNEM CHANDRA JAIN & OTHERS.

1983 INSC 18725 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two issues arising from a Rajya Sabha election in Uttar Pradesh: whether the Secretary of the State Legislative Assembly could be appointed as Returning Officer under Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and whether an elected Assembly member who had not yet taken the oat

PRINCIPAL, KING GEORGE'S MEDICAL COLLEGE LUCKNOWversusDR. VISHAN KUMAR AGARWAL &. ANOTHER

1983 INSC 16025 October 1983Dismissed

Dr. V.K. Agarwal, having completed his MBBS, one year of compulsory housemanship and three years as a Medical Officer, applied in October 1974 for admission to the M.D. (Physiology) course at King George's Medical College, Lucknow. The Principal rejected his application, contending that Agarwal had not satisfied the cl

CHARANJI LALversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1983 INSC 16125 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

A food inspector seized a sample of kutcha khoya from the appellant’s sweet‑meat shop, divided it into three parts and sent one to the public analyst (who found adulteration) and two to the local health authority. The appellant invoked his right under s.13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act to have a part ex

FORASOLversusOIL & NATURAL GAS COMMISSION (AND VICE VERSA)

1983 INSC 16225 October 1983Disposed off

Forasol, a French company, entered into a drilling contract with ONGC that required most payments in French Francs and 20% in Indian rupees at a fixed rate. After the rupee was devalued, Forasol claimed a higher conversion rate, which the arbitrator awarded without specifying a rate for the Franc portion. The Delhi Hig

STATEversusJASPAL SINGH GILL

1984 INSC 11825 June 1984Case Allowed

The respondents, including Jaspal Singh Gill, were charged under sections 3, 5 and 9 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 read with section 120‑B of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly passing classified military information to a foreign agency. While the trial was pending, Gill applied for bail before the Additional Sess

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1984 INSC 9125 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard a special leave appeal (Civil Appeal No. 2182 of 1984) filed by the Election Commission of India against an ex‑parte order of the Punjab & Haryana High Court that stayed the election programme for a by‑election in the Taoru Assembly constituency. The High Court had intervened despite the imminen

RAM NATH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

1984 INSC 9225 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of land acquired under the Resettlement of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act, 1948, challenged two provisos in Section 7(1)(e) that fixed compensation based on the market value as of September 1, 1939 plus 40 percent, arguing that they violated Section 299(2) of the Government of India Ac

SADHU SINGH RODA S/O BUTA SINGH ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1984 INSC 2125 January 1984Disposed off

The petitioners, all serving life sentences, claimed that having satisfied the detention periods prescribed in Paragraph 516‑B of the Punjab Jail Manual, they were entitled to have their cases considered for premature release. They argued that Paragraph 516‑B is a statutory rule and cannot be altered by the State Gover

SEBASTIAN M. HONGRAYversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 20524 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, a student, filed a writ of habeas corpus under Article 32 of the Constitution on behalf of C. Daniel and C. Paul, who were allegedly taken by jawans of the 21st Sikh Regiment from Huining village to Phungrei camp on 10 March 1982 and thereafter disappeared. The respondents (Union of India, State of Mani

HINDUSTANI ANDOLAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

1983 INSC 18424 November 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, two public‑spirited organisations, sought a writ of mandamus directing the police to enter any place of worship where criminals were suspected to be sheltering. The petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution. The Court held that it is not within judicial competence to issue a general manda

SOUNDARARAJversusDEVASAHAYAM & ORS.

1983 INSC 15924 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Soundararaj sued the respondents for demarcation of his property boundary and a mandatory injunction to remove eaves protruding onto his land. The trial court, after accepting the commissioner’s report, decreed a boundary wall and ordered removal of the eaves. Both the subordinate judge and a Single Judge of the Madras

UNION OF INDIAversusBIDHUBHUSHAN MALIK AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 8924 April 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the words "and who has retired on or after the 1st day of October 1974" (as printed in some versions as 1984) in paragraph 10 of the First Schedule of the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 (as amended). The petitioners argued that the provision was v

N.L. ABHYANKAR AND OTHERS ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA

1984 INSC 9024 April 1984Case Allowed

The petitioners, former judges of the High Court and Supreme Court, challenged the denial of pensionary benefits under the Conditions of Service (Amendment) Act, 1976. The Supreme Court examined whether the amendment entitled all retired judges to pension benefits irrespective of their retirement dates and whether arre

ANOOP JAISWALversusGOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ANR.

1984 INSC 1924 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Anoop Jaiswal, a probationary officer of the Indian Police Service, was discharged by the Government of India after being deemed a ring‑leader responsible for a 22‑minute delay during a training exercise on 22 June 1981. The Director of the National Police Academy recommended discharge without conducting an enquiry, an

J. D. SHRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF M. P. & OTHERS

1984 INSC 1824 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior judicial officer, was compulsorily retired at age 55 under Fundamental Rule 56(3)(a) after a High Court Full Court meeting decided to screen officers for promotion. The High Court recommended his retirement and denied promotion, relying on some adverse confidential entries from about twenty year

A. S. PARMAR & OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS

1984 INSC 2024 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the promotion of eight Class II Assistant Engineers, all diploma holders, to the Class I cadre of Executive Engineers in the Haryana Public Works Department. The petitioners challenged the promotions, arguing that Rule 6(a) of the Punjab Service of Engineers (Class I) Rules required a university degr

MECLEOD & CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

1983 INSC 18223 November 1983Dismissed

Mecleod & Co. Ltd., a Calcutta‑registered company, was appointed managing agent and secretary‑treasurer for two jute mills (Nellimarla and Chitavalsah) that were registered as dealers under the Orissa Taxation (on Goods carried by Road and Inland Waterways) Act, 1959. Mecleod handled the storage of jute in godowns at K

BIHARILAL DOBRAYversusROSHAN LAL DOBRAY

1983 INSC 18323 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1980 Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, the nomination of Roshanlal Dobray, an Assistant Teacher in a basic primary school, was rejected on the ground that he held an office of profit under the State Government, disqualifying him under Article 191(1)(a) of the Constitution. The High Court held that the

DEENA@DEEN DAYAL ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12623 September 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, sentenced to death for murder, challenged the constitutionality of Section 354(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which mandates execution by hanging, alleging it is cruel, barbarous and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court examined whether hanging constitutes a cruel or degrading

GULAM ABBAS AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12723 September 1983Case Allowed

The Supreme Court was asked to decide whether two graves on a disputed plot in Varanasi could be shifted to alleviate recurring sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni communities. The Court held that moving the graves was not irreligious nor a violation of Sunni fundamental rights, as Articles 25 and 26 of the Const

P.S. MAHAL & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1984 INSC 11323 May 1984Case Allowed

The case concerned the inter‑se seniority of Executive Engineers in the Central Public Works Department who had been promoted from the grades of Assistant Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer. The petitioners challenged the Executive Engineers, Central Engineering and Central Electrical Engineering Service (Group

SEBASTIAN M. HONGRAYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

1984 INSC 8823 April 1984Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a writ of habeas corpus filed by Sebastian M. Hongray seeking the production of two missing persons, C. Daniel and C. Paul, who were alleged to be unlawfully detained. The respondents – the Union of India, the Ministry of Defence and the commanding officer of the 21st Sikh Regiment – faile

ARJUN CHAUBEYversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 6623 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Arjun Chaubey, a senior clerk in the Northern Railway, was served with twelve charges of gross indiscipline, many of which related to the Deputy Chief Commercial Superintendent (Respondent 3). After submitting explanations, Respondent 3 himself evaluated the explanations and dismissed Chaubey under Rule 14(ii) of the R

R. PALANIMUTHUversusRETURNING OFFICER

1984 INSC 4623 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged the election of the second respondent from a Scheduled Tribes reserved assembly constituency, alleging that the respondent falsely claimed to belong to the Konda Reddy Scheduled Tribe and had obtained a fraudulent community certificate. The Returning Officer had accepted the nomination based on

UNION OF INDIA & OTHERSversusHAJI MASTAN MIRZA

1984 INSC 4523 February 1984Dismissed

Haji Mastan Mirza was first detained under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA) and subsequently under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1973 (COFEPOSA). A show‑cause notice under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976

H. ANRAJ AND OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1984 INSC 1623 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, agents for selling lottery tickets of other Indian states, challenged a press release by the Maharashtra Government that declared the sale of such tickets unlawful. They argued that the ban lacked constitutional authority because lotteries organised by any State or the Union fall under the exclusive le

RAMENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 1723 January 1984Dismissed

Ramendra Singh filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court challenging a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that dismissed his claim that a minor son could claim a separate ceiling area under the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960. The petition argued that Section 6(ii), read with Sectio

MADHUSDAN SINGH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1983 INSC 18122 November 1983Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 14M, 17(c), 17(1) and 21B of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 as amended by the 1972 and 1977 Amendment Acts, alleging that the amendments were confiscatory, violated Articles 14, 19 and 31C, and were not covered by the Ninth Schedule. The Court e

SMT. ASLHING @ LHINGJANQNGversusL.S. JOHN & ORS.

1983 INSC 18022 November 1983Dismissed

The appellant challenged the respondent's claim that a contract with the Government for widening a road was still subsisting at the time the respondent filed his nomination paper. The respondent had sent a letter on 30 November 1979 to the Executive Engineer stating that he was closing the contract and had resigned fro

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusATIC INDUSTRIES LIMITED

1984 INSC 11622 June 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India challenged a demand for differential excise duty on dyes manufactured by ATIC Industries Ltd., arguing that the definition of "related person" in the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 was unconstitutional and that ATIC's wholesale buyers, Atul Products Ltd. and Crescent Dyes & Chemicals Ltd., were "r

DR. PRADEEP JAIN ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 11722 June 1984Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether state-imposed domicile or residence requirements for admission to MBBS and postgraduate medical courses violated the Constitution’s guarantee of equality. It held that wholesale reservation based solely on domicile is unconstitutional, but a limited reservation of up to 70% of seats (

H.D. VORAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1984 INSC 4422 February 1984Dismissed

The appellant was allotted a flat in 1951 under an order of requisition issued by the State Government under the Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, without the order specifying a public purpose. He occupied the flat, paying rent irregularly, and later the building was purchased by the third respondent who sought derequ

DAYARAM ASANAND GURSAHANIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 4222 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a District Judge, sought to have his seniority counted from his earlier service as an Assistant Judge under the Bombay Judicial Service Recruitment Rules and to receive the salary and allowances of the selection‑grade pay scale, as well as posting as an Inspecting District Judge. The Bombay High Court re

BALASAHEB VISHNU CHAVANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1984 INSC 4322 February 1984Dismissed

The appellants, who were promoted to Assistant Judges from the Junior Branch of the Maharashtra Judicial Service, claimed seniority over four Bar recruits (respondents Nos. 2‑5) who were appointed as Assistant Judges under the proviso of Rule 5(2)(i)(b) before being promoted to District Judges. The High Court dismissed

BHAGIRATH SINGH S/O MAHIPAT SINGH JUDEJAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1983 INSC 17821 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under Section 307 IPC for stabbing a victim and was granted bail by the Sessions Judge. The State appealed, and the Gujarat High Court cancelled the bail, citing the victim's status as a social and political worker and the seriousness of the offence. The Supreme Court held that cancellation of

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHERversusDINA NATH

1983 INSC 17921 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Dina Nath, defaulted on liquor licence fees and was subjected to revenue recovery proceedings under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, resulting in a proclamation prohibiting the transfer of his half‑share in a residential property and notifying it for auction. He filed a suit seeking a permanent injunc

SHER SINGH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 15521 October 1983Dismissed

Sher Singh, a private operator holding stage‑carriage permits on an inter‑state route, applied for renewal of his permits under Section 58 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation applied for a fresh permit on the same route. The Regional Transport Authority, invoking Section 47(1

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, GUJARATversusVIMLABEN VADILAL MEHTA

1983 INSC 15621 October 1983Dismissed

The Gujarat Commissioner of Wealth Tax appealed against a decision allowing Shri Vadilal Mehta to deduct certain tax liabilities in computing his net wealth for the 1964-65 wealth‑tax assessment year. The assessee sought deductions for income‑tax, wealth‑tax and gift‑tax liabilities that were quantified by assessment o

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX GUJARAT, AHMEDABADversusVADILAL LALLUBHAI ETC.

1983 INSC 15721 October 1983Dismissed

The assessee, while computing his net wealth for the assessment year 1962-63, claimed deductions for debts representing estimated liabilities of income tax, wealth tax and gift tax. The Wealth Tax Officer rejected the claim, stating that estimated liabilities could not be treated as debts on the valuation date. The App

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, MADRASversusK. S. N. BHATT

1983 INSC 15821 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The assessee, K.S.N. Bhatt, claimed deductions in his wealth‑tax returns for income‑tax, wealth‑tax and gift‑tax liabilities, arguing that these amounts were debts owed on the valuation dates for the assessment years 1964‑65 to 1967‑68. The Wealth Tax Officer allowed only part of the deductions; the Appellate Assistant

MUMTAZ HUSSAIN ANSARIversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

1984 INSC 6321 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Deputy Superintendent of Police, was removed from service after a departmental inquiry found him guilty of three charges. He sought to summon eight private defence witnesses, but the Uttar Pradesh Administrative Tribunal required him to deposit Rs. 900 for their travel and daily allowances before they

AJOY KUMAR BANERJEE & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDLA & ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 6421 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, employees of the nationalised general insurance companies, challenged the 30 September 1980 notification introducing the General Insurance (Rationalisation and Revision of Pay Scales and Other Conditions of Service) Second Amendment Scheme, alleging it violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 31 of the Const

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusG.M. KOKIL AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 6521 March 1984Dismissed

The Union of India appealed a decision of the Central Government Labour Court which had granted overtime wages at double the ordinary rate to 78 employees of the India Security Press, Nasik, under s.59 of the Factories Act read with s.70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. The appellants argued that the r

SMT. M.M. AMONKAR & OTHERSversusDR. S.A. JOHARI

1984 INSC 4121 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. S.A. Johari, an honorary surgeon attached to Dr. Amonkar Hospital, occupied a small cabin within the hospital premises and paid a monthly compensation. The Amonkar family, owners of the premises, gave notice terminating his attachment and sought his eviction. Johari filed a suit claiming he was a "protected license

GRAMOPHONE COMPANY OF INDIA LTD.versusBIRENDRA BAHADUR PANDEY & ORS.

1984 INSC 4021 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Gramophone Company of India sought to prevent the import of cassette recordings it alleged were pirated and destined for transit to Nepal. It applied to the Registrar of Copyrights under s.53 of the Copyright Act, 1957, to have the cassettes declared prohibited imports. The Calcutta High Court allowed the Registrar

PANDURANG DATTATREYA KHANDEKARversusTHE BAR COUNCIL OF MAHARASHTRA BOMBAY & ORS.

1983 INSC 15220 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

P.D. Khandekar and A.N. Agavane were found guilty of professional misconduct by the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India for giving improper legal advice in two matters – a purported marriage and a gift deed – and were suspended for four months and two months respectively. They appealed to the Supreme Cou

M/S PUNJAB TIN SUPPLY CO.,CHANDIGARH ETC. ETC.versusTHE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT & ORS.

1983 INSC 15420 October 1983Dismissed

The petitioners challenged three notifications issued by the Chief Commissioner of Chandigarh under Section 3 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (as extended to Chandigarh), arguing that the section delegated excessive legislative power, violated Article 14, was ultra‑violet of the Act’s object, and th

ACHARYA JAGDISHWARANAND AVADHUTA, ETC.versusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CALCUTTA & ANR.

1983 INSC 15320 October 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the Ananda Marga socio‑spiritual organization, sought a writ directing the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, to allow them to hold public processions accompanied by the Tandava dance. They claimed that Ananda Marga is a separate religion and that the Tandava dance is an essential religious r

GHANSHYAM DASS AND OTHERSversusDOMINION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 6220 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff's father, Seth Lachhman Dass Gupta, had a contract with the Government for supplying charcoal and, due to a price escalation clause, served a notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) demanding the higher price. He died before filing a suit, and his three sons filed the suit as his lega

RAVI DUTT SHARMAversusRATAN LAL BHARGAVA

1984 INSC 3720 February 1984Dismissed

The landlord, Ratan Lal, sought to evict his tenant, Ravi Dutt Sharma, under section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. He had earlier applied for permission under section 19(1)(a) of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956, but the application was dismissed. The tenant argued that the landlord

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, PATNAversusRAGHUBIR NARAIN SINGH

1984 INSC 3920 February 1984Dismissed

The Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Patna, appealed against the assessment of Raghubir Narain Singh's net wealth under the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The issues concerned how to value assets and debts, including pending decree amounts and agricultural income‑tax liabilities, for computing net wealth under Section 7 and Section 

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, BIHAR, PATNAversusMAHARAJA KUMAR KAMAL SINGH

1984 INSC 3820 February 1984Dismissed

The Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Bihar appealed against the Patna High Court’s decision that Maharaja Kumar Kamal Singh’s right to receive compensation under the Bihar Land Reforms Act should be valued at nil because of arrears of agricultural income‑tax. The central issue was whether such tax arrears could be deducted

B. S. MINHASversusINDIAN STATISTICAL INSTITUTE & ORS.

1983 INSC 15119 October 1983Case Allowed

The petitioners challenged the appointment of Shri B.P. Adhikari as Director of the Indian Statistical Institute (ISI) on the grounds that the ISI, being a body controlled by the Union Government, is a "state" or "other authority" under Article 12 and therefore subject to judicial review under Article 32. They also con

RAM JETHMALANI, ETCversusUNION OF INDIA, ETC.

1984 INSC 11519 June 1984Matter referred to larger bench

The petitioners, members of the Sikh community, challenged their detention under the National Security Act, 1980, by filing writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution. Justice Venkataramiah observed that these matters were not ordinary criminal cases but involved serious questions of national security and the

S. SHAMSHUDDIN & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

1984 INSC 8718 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the Central Government's fixation of a uniform quota of 50 all‑India tourist permits per State under Section 63(7) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (as amended by the 1969 Amendment), alleging that the quota was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court examined whet

VISHNU DAYAL JHUNJHUNWALA & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 8618 April 1984Dismissed

The appellant owned a sugar mill that had been permanently shut down before the Central Government issued an order under Rule 125A of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, taking over its management and appointing an authorised controller. The appellant argued that because the mill was closed and not engaged in production,

PUNJAB UNIVERSITY CHANDIGARHversusDEVJANI CHAKRABARTI & OTHERS

1984 INSC 10917 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab University had initially recognised the 12th standard examination of the 10+2+3 system as equivalent to its pre‑University exams, but later altered this policy in April and May 1980, stating that only examinations conducted by recognised boards would be deemed equivalent. A group of students who had relied o

PUNJAB UNIVERSITYversusSUBASH CHANDER AND ANR.

1984 INSC 11017 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned Subash Chander, who entered the M.B.B.S. programme of Punjab University in 1965 under Regulation 25 which allowed grace marks up to 1% of the total aggregate. In 1970 the University amended the rule, adding an exception that for M.B.B.S. examinations grace marks could be given only up to 1% of each s

L.D. JAIKWALversusSTATE OF U.P.

1984 INSC 11117 May 1984Dismissed

Senior advocate L.D. Jaikwal, after being asked to appear in proper court attire before a Special Judge, left the courtroom and later submitted a written application using scurrilous language, calling the judge a "corrupt judge" and "contaminating the seat of justice" and forwarding copies to various authorities. The A

STATE OF PUNJABversusNOHAR CHAND

1984 INSC 11217 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab prosecuted Nohar Chand, a fertilizer manufacturer in Ludhiana, for producing sub‑standard fertilizer that was marketed through his agent, Sachdeva Enterprises, in Kapurthala. A sample taken from the agent’s premises was found sub‑standard, leading to a criminal complaint under the Essential Commodit

MANICK CHAND PAUL & OTHERS ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 8217 April 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined writ petitions filed by licensed gold dealers challenging several provisions of the Gold Control Act, 1968 (as amended) and its associated rules on the grounds that they violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 301 and 302 of the Constitution. The petitioners argued that sections 16(7), 52, 79 (and it

ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 8517 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the validity of an order and judgment previously passed by this Court. The central issue was whether the Supreme Court could entertain a writ petition against its own order or judgment. The Court held that a writ petition cannot be u

ANANT KIBE & ORS.versusPURUSHOTTAM RAO & ORS

1984 INSC 8317 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a family dispute over a 15.62‑acre inam garden granted in 1837, which had become part of the joint Hindu family estate. After the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 came into force, the inam holder became a bhumiswami under s.158(1)(b), and the question arose whether this conversion gave him excl

MANCHEGOWDA ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA ETC.

1984 INSC 8417 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners, who had purchased lands originally granted by the State of Karnataka to members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, challenged the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, alleging that sections 4 and 5 violated Articles 19(1)(f), 31, 3

RAMENDRA SINGHversusJAGDISH PRASAD AND ORS.

1984 INSC 3617 February 1984Dismissed

The case arose from the Bihar Public Works Department's appointment of twelve mechanical sub‑overseers on a temporary basis during a World Bank project in 1964. The appointments were made retrospectively, with effect from the date of publication of their diploma examination results, and were later challenged as violati

LT. COL. S. J. CHAUDHARYversusSTATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)

1984 INSC 1417 January 1984Dismissed

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking modification of a Sessions Court order that the trial proceed on a day‑to‑day basis, arguing that his counsel were not prepared to appear continuously as the trial was expected to be lengthy. The Court examined the duty of counsel in criminal proceedings an

KAILASH SONKARversusSMT. MAYA DEVI

1983 INSC 20016 December 1983Dismissed

The case concerned an election dispute in Madhya Pradesh where the respondent, Maya Devi, claimed to belong to the Katia scheduled caste despite being born to Christian parents. The appellant challenged her eligibility, arguing that conversion to Christianity caused a loss of caste and that reconversion could not reviv

P.K.RAMACHANDRA IYER & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1983 INSC 20416 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from several writ and review petitions filed by senior scientists of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and its affiliates alleging discrimination in pay scales, illegal selection procedures, and denial of statutory rights. The petitioners claimed that ICAR, though registered as a society

HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITEDversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

1983 INSC 20116 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd, a manufacturer and service provider for aircraft, entered into a 1951 contract with the President of India (the owner) to service, repair and overhaul Air Force aircraft. The contract required the contractor to supply spare parts when the owner failed to do so, with the parts to be treated as

HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD.versusTHE STATE OF ORISSA

1983 INSC 20216 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd.'s (HAL) manufacture of MIG engines for the Government of India constituted a contract of sale liable to Central Sales Tax or a works contract exempt from tax. The Government of India, under a licence from the USSR, entrusted HAL to assemble and fit the engin

STATE OF PUNJABversusJAGDEV SINGH TALWANDI

1983 INSC 19916 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the detention of J.S. Talwandi under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980. The respondent argued that the detaining authority failed to provide sufficient particulars of the first ground of detention, violating Article 22(5) of the Constitution, and that the District Magistrate’s fail

BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHAversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1983 INSC 20316 December 1983Disposed off

The petition, filed by a social welfare organisation, alleged that thousands of migrant workers in stone quarries and crushers in Faridabad were subjected to inhuman conditions, forced labour and bondage, violating their fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 23 of the Constitution. The Court treated the letter addre

BISHNU RAM BORAH & ANR.versusPARAG SAIKIA & ORS.

1983 INSC 17716 November 1983Disposed off

The dispute concerned the grant of a liquor licence for Jorhat Country Spirit Shop No. I under the Assam Excise Rules, which give preference to "educated unemployed youth". The Board of Revenue upheld the licence in favour of the appellants, Bishnu Ram Borah and Bipin Chand Borah, rejecting the claims of respondents Pa

R. S. NAYAKversusA.R. ANTULAY

1984 INSC 3216 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant R.S. Nayak filed a private complaint against the respondent A.R. Antulay, then Chief Minister of Maharashtra, alleging corruption under Sections 161, 164, 165 IPC and Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The complaint was initially dismissed for lack of a sanction under Section 6 of the 19

VIVEKA NAND GIRIversusNAWAL KISHORE SAHI

1984 INSC 3416 February 1984Dismissed

The appellant, having been elected to the Bihar Legislative Assembly, challenged the rejection of four of his nomination papers by the Returning Officer, particularly the paper rejected on the ground of a four‑year age discrepancy between the electoral roll and the nomination. The respondent, the defeated candidate, fi

JAVED RASOOL BHAT & ORS. ETCversusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND ORS.

1984 INSC 3516 February 1984Dismissed

The State of Jammu & Kashmir advertised admission to its two medical colleges, requiring a written test (85 points) and a viva‑voce interview (15 points). A selection committee comprising the Chairman of the Public Service Commission and the principals of the two colleges was formed. One principal disclosed that his da

A.R. ANTULAYversusRAMDAS SRINIWAS NAYAK AND ANOTHER

1984 INSC 3316 February 1984Dismissed

The appellant, A.R. Antulay, challenged the jurisdiction of a Special Judge who had taken cognizance of corruption offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, based on a private complaint filed by the respondent, R.S. Nayak. The issues were whether a Special Judge could entertain a private complaint under th

AVTAR SINGH BRARversusTAJ SINGH & OTHERS

1984 INSC 1116 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Avtar Singh Brar challenged the election of Tej Singh to the Punjab Legislative Assembly, alleging that Tej Singh had engaged in a corrupt practice by circulating posters that falsely claimed candidate Ruplal had withdrawn and that votes for Tej Singh would count as votes for Ruplal. Evidence, including printing vouche

DAULAT RAM CHAUHANversusANAND SHARMA

1984 INSC 1316 January 1984Disposed off

An election petition filed by Anand Sharma challenged the election of Daulat Ram Chauhan to the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly on the ground that Chauhan, his election agent and two other candidates, K.D. Batish and Puran Chand Sood, allegedly used libelous slogans and pamphlets to alienate voters, constituting

PRITAM DASS MAHANTversusSHIROMANI GURUDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE

1984 INSC 1216 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Sixty‑five persons claiming to be Sikhs applied to the Punjab Government under Section 7(1) of the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 to have the Dera Bhai Bhagtu in Ramgarh declared a Sikh Gurdwara. The State Government issued a notification, after which the appellant, Pritam Dass, filed a petition under Sections 8 and 10 assert

C.I.T. WEST BENGAL - III & ORS. ETC.versusORIENTAL RUBBER WORKS ETC .

1983 INSC 17615 November 1983Dismissed

The Income Tax Department seized the books of account and documents of Oriental Rubber Works under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and retained them beyond the statutory period of 180 days. The assessee contended that the Revenue failed to communicate the Commissioner’s approval and the recorded reasons for

CHINGLEPUT BOTTLERSversusMAJESTIC BOTTLING COMPANY

1984 INSC 5915 March 1984Disposed off

The Madras High Court, on a petition under Art. 226, quashed the Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise’s order rejecting two licence applications and, by mandamus, directed the Commissioner to grant a licence to Majestic Bottling Company despite the requirement of prior State Government approval under Rule 7 of the Tami

JAGDISH PRASADversusSMT. ANGOORI DEVI

1984 INSC 6015 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Jagdish Prasad, a tenant, was evicted by his landlord Angoori Devi on the allegation that he had sub‑let the premises to Pavan Trading Company. The trial court presumed sub‑letting solely from a photograph showing the son of the trading company’s proprietor in the shop, and ordered eviction. The Additional District Jud

JITENDRA SINGH RATHORversusSHRI BAIDYANATH AYURVED BHAWAN LTD. & ANR.

1984 INSC 6115 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Jitendra Singh Rathor, a librarian, was terminated for misconduct and filed a complaint before the Industrial Tribunal under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Tribunal held that although misconduct was proved, termination was unwarranted and ordered reinstatement with half of the back wages. The emp

SHAYAM BABUversusDISTRICT JUDGE, MORADABAD & OTHERS

1983 INSC 19714 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords of a shop applied under section 21 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 for release of the premises for personal use, invoking the fourth proviso which requires consideration of comparative hardship. The shop had been let to Krishan Kumar, who, with the

JAI SINGHversusSARWAN SINGH & OTHERS

1983 INSC 17514 November 1983Disposed off

The respondents, members of the Harijan community, were convicted of murder and related offences for the killing of Dhian Singh, a Rajput, amid a land dispute between the two factions. While hearing the criminal appeal, the Punjab and Haryana High Court attempted to settle the underlying civil land dispute by convening

BOMBAY OIL INDUSTRIESversusUNION OF INDIA

1983 INSC 17414 November 1983Dismissed

Bombay Oil Industries challenged a Government order issued under Sections 21, 22 and 23 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, alleging that it was not supplied with material necessary to contest the order. The Court examined whether the Government, as an administrative tribunal, must give adequat

SHRI VALLABH GLASS WORKS LTD. & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1984 INSC 5814 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. and others, manufacturers of various types of glass, challenged the levy of excise duty by the Central Excise Department under Item 23A(1) of the Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944, contending that their products were not "sheet glass" and should be taxed under the residual Item 68. After the Assi

A. MADAN MOHANversusKALAVAKUNTA CHANDRASEKHARA

1984 INSC 3014 February 1984Dismissed

The respondent filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices by the returned candidate. The returned candidate sought dismissal of the petition in limine under Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, claiming the petition violated Section 81(3) because copies of documents and schedules were not serv

CHARAN LAL SAHU & OTHERSversusGIANI ZAIL SINGH & ANOTHER

1983 INSC 19613 December 1983Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined three election petitions challenging the election of Giani Zail Singh as President of India. The petitioners, who had not been duly nominated as candidates under the Presidential and Vice‑Presidential Elections Act, 1952, claimed the returned candidate exercised undue influence and was unsuit

PREM CHAND JAIN & ANRversusR. K. CHHABRA

1984 INSC 2913 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, members of Commercial University Ltd (CUL), were prosecuted under Section 24 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 for continuing to use the word "University" and for conferring degrees after the Act came into force, despite CUL being incorporated under the Companies Act, 1913. The central issue

CHAND KUMAR KAPURversusCHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER PUNJAB & ORS.

1983 INSC 19512 December 1983Dismissed

The appellant, a displaced person from West Pakistan, was allotted about six standard acres of land in a semi‑urban village under the quasi‑permanent scheme of the East Punjab Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1947. In 1952 the Director of Rehabilitation proposed, and the Governor approved, a 50% premium cut for

DELHI VETERINARY ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1984 INSC 8112 April 1984Dismissed

The Delhi Veterinary Association filed a writ petition under Article 32 alleging that Veterinary Assistant Surgeons employed by the Delhi Administration were paid lower salaries than their counterparts in Chandigarh, the Indo‑Tibetan Border Police and the Border Security Force, thereby violating the constitutional prin

VIJAY NARAIN SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS

1984 INSC 8012 April 1984Case Allowed

Vijay Narain Singh, who had been granted bail in a criminal trial for murder and related offences, was detained under Section 12(2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 on the ground that he was an "anti‑social element". The State relied on three incidents (1975, 1982 and the pending murder case) to justify detenti

GOPI NATH GHOSHversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

1983 INSC 17311 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Gopinath Ghosh was convicted by a Sessions Court and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder under IPC sections 302 and 34. He later contended before the Supreme Court that he was a "child" under the West Bengal Children Act, 1959, being only 16‑17 years old at the time of the offence. The Court ordered a medical age

SMT. SURINDAR KAUR SANDHUversusHARBAX SINGH SANDHU & ANR.

1984 INSC 7911 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Surinder Kaur Sandhu and Harbax Singh Sandhu, both Indian citizens, married in 1975 and moved to England where their son Pritpal Singh was born in 1976, making him a British citizen. After the husband was convicted for attempting to murder his wife and later removed the child to India in 1983, the wife obtained a ward

BHASKAR TEXTILE MILLS LTD.versusJHARSUGUDA MUNICIPALITY & OTHER

1984 INSC 1011 January 1984Dismissed

Bhaskar Textile Mills Ltd., a company situated in the village of Ektali, challenged the Jharsuguda Municipality’s inclusion of the village within its limits and the subsequent levy of octroi duty on cotton. The municipality had extended its jurisdiction through notifications dated 31 July 1973 and 12 August 1975 under

KATHEEJA BAIversusTHE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER & ORS.

1984 INSC 10710 May 1984Case Allowed

The petitioner, Katheeja Bai, widow of a retired Tamil Nadu Electricity Board employee, claimed that the Board had failed to credit the special contribution mandated by Regulation 37 of the Board’s Contributory Provident Fund Regulations to her late husband’s provident fund account. The Board contended that this specia

ANANDILAL & ANRversusRAM NARAIN & ORS.

1984 INSC 10810 May 1984Dismissed

Anandilal and others, the original decree‑holders, had obtained a decree against the respondents which was affirmed by the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the High Court stayed execution of the decree under Order XLI, r.5 of the CPC, but only the sale of the attached properties was stayed, not the attach

JETHSUR SURANGBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1983 INSC 1729 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Jethsur Surangbhai, Chairman of the Jasdan Taluka Sahkari Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd, was charged under IPC sections 120B, 109, 408, 467 and 471 for alleged conspiracy to commit criminal breach of trust and related misappropriations. The charge of conspiracy failed and the Sessions Court acquitted all accused except one.

KHAZAN CHAND ETC.versusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 289 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, registered dealers under the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962, filed quarterly returns but failed to pay the tax on time, leading the Assessing Authority to levy interest under section 8 of the Act. They challenged the constitutional validity of sections 8(1), 8(2) and 8(3) on grounds of v

RAM CHANDRA MAWA LAL AND OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS ETC.

1984 INSC 89 January 1984Dismissed

The case concerned a challenge by fertilizer dealers to a Uttar Pradesh Government notification issued under Rule 114 of the Defence of India Rules, 1971, which fixed the selling price of fertilizer stocks acquired before 31 May 1974 at the lower price fixed by an earlier Central Government notification of 11 October 1

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, DAVANGEREversusP. VEERABHADARAPPA ETC. ETC .

1984 INSC 99 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The State Government acquired several thousand acres of agricultural land in 1971-72 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) awarded compensation using a multiplier of fifteen years' purchase of net annual profits, which the High Court upheld. The respondents argued that the mu

INDER MAL JAIN & ANR. ETCversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 1948 December 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, who operated as railway travel agents serving middle‑ and lower‑middle‑class passengers, challenged the constitutionality of Section 114A of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 and the Railway Tourist Agent Rules, 1980, alleging that the provisions imposed unreasonable and arbitrary restrictions on their rig

AZMAT KHANversusKHILLAN SINGH & OTHERS

1983 INSC 1718 November 1983Dismissed

In the 1980 Haryana Legislative Assembly election for constituency No.5 (Hathin), the returned candidate Azmatkhan secured 12,828 votes and was declared elected. Respondent Khillan Singh filed an election petition, and the returned candidate filed a recrimination petition under Section 97 of the Representation of the P

A. YOUNUS KUNJUversusR.S. UNNI & OTHERS

1984 INSC 578 March 1984Dismissed

In the 1982 Kerala Legislative Assembly election for Eravipuram, appellant A. Younus Kunju lost to R.S. Unni by 789 votes and filed a petition alleging corrupt practices under Section 123(4) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, claiming that Unni's election agent Azeez published a hand‑bill falsely accusing Kunju

VED PRAKASH GUPTAversusDELTON CABLE INDIA (P) LTD.

1984 INSC 568 March 1984Disposed off

Ved Prakash Gupta, employed as a security inspector at Delton Cable India, was dismissed after a domestic enquiry found him guilty of abusing a worker. The Labour Court initially held he was not a "workman" under s.2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, rendering the reference invalid, but the Supreme Court directe

MRS. WINIFRED ROSS & ANR.versusMRS. IVY FONSECA & ORS.

1983 INSC 1937 December 1983Dismissed

The plaintiff, a retired Indian Army officer, acquired a portion of a property by gift after his retirement and sought to evict a tenant under section 13A(1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, producing a certificate from the Army. The trial court granted the eviction, but the High Co

SHIV CHAND AMOLAK CHANDversusREGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY & ANR.

1983 INSC 1497 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a partnership holding a stage‑carriage permit, sought to extend their route after a portion had been deleted by a nationalisation scheme and a subsequent state notification allowing short district‑headquarter routes. The Regional Transport Authority (RTA) rejected the extension, holding that the applica

KRISHNA PRIYA GANGULY ETC.versusUNIVERSITY OF LUCKNOW & ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 1457 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a series of petitions challenging the denial of admission to postgraduate medical courses in Uttar Pradesh. The State Government had issued an order under s.28(5) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 prescribing that merit for admission be determined solely by the percentage of marks obta

KAMLAKAR PRASAD CHATURVEDIversusSTATE OF M. P. & ANR

1983 INSC 1467 October 1983Case Allowed

The petitioner, Kamlakar Prasad Chaturvedi, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on seven grounds, two of which related to incidents that occurred in 1978 and 1980, more than five and two years respectively before the detention order dated 6 May 1983. The petitioner challenged the order on

THE NEW THEATERS (CARNATIC TALKIES) LTD., COIMBATOREversusN. VAJRAPANI NAIDU

1983 INSC 1477 October 1983Dismissed

The appellant, New Theatres (Carnatic Talkies) Ltd., held a lease for land on which it built a theatre and later claimed a right to purchase the site under Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants' Protection Act, 1921. The respondent, N.V. Naidu, sought the appellant's eviction and the matter proceeded through multiple su

RAISUDDIN @ BABU TAMCHIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

1983 INSC 1507 October 1983Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the preventive detention of Raisuddin under the National Security Act, 1980, alleging that the State Government failed to forward the detainee's representation to the Advisory Board within the statutory period, thereby violating Section 10 of the Act. The Court examined whether a delay in for

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusBOMBAY TYRE INTERNATIONAL LTD. ETC. ETC.

1983 INSC 1487 October 1983Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the interpretation of Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, both before and after its amendment by the Central Excises and Salt (Amendment) Act, 1973, to determine how the "value" of an excisable article should be computed for excise duty. The Court held that the value is not l

NIRANKAR NATH WAHI AND OTHERSversusFIFTH ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, MORADABAD AND ORS.

1984 INSC 1147 June 1984

The landlord appellant sought an adjournment of his appeal before the Additional District Judge, Moradabad, because his senior counsel was unavailable. The judge refused the request, granted only three days to make alternative arrangements, and then pronounced a judgment that had been prepared in advance, dismissing th

SHIV DAYAL SHRIVASTAVAversusUNION OF INDIA

1984 INSC 277 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Retired Chief Justice Shiv Dayal Shrivastava filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking the cash equivalent of his unutilised earned leave. The Supreme Court had earlier held in Union of India v. Gurnam Singh that judges are entitled to such payment under Rule 20B of the All India Services (Leave) Rules, 1955. The

ABHJJIT SEN & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1983 INSC 1916 December 1983Disposed off

Four candidates who had failed to secure admission to MBBS courses challenged the answer key used in the Multiple Choice Objective Type Test conducted by Kanpur University. They argued that the key answers for two zoology questions were demonstrably wrong, and that their own answers, supported by recognized textbooks,

SMT. SARABATI DEVI. & ANR.versusSMT. USHA DEVI

1983 INSC 1926 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a nominee under Section 39 of the Insurance Act, 1938 acquires a beneficial interest in the proceeds of a life‑insurance policy when the assured dies intestate. The deceased, governed by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, had nominated his wife as the sole nominee. The wife claimed exclu

GLAXO LABORATORIESversusTHE PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT MEERUT & ORS.

1983 INSC 1416 October 1983Dismissed

Glaxo Laboratories, a multinational employer, charged a striking worker and his co‑workers with misconduct under clauses 10, 16 and 30 of Standing Order 22, alleging they boarded a company bus and assaulted "loyal" workmen. The worker sought interpretation of the standing order under s.11‑C of the U.P. Industrial Dispu

RAM SARUPversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1983 INSC 1446 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Sarup, dismissed from service, filed a suit as an indigent person which was dismissed. He appealed to the Delhi High Court as a pauper under Rule 1 of Order 44, CPC, seeking permission to appeal without paying court fees. The High Court dismissed the application by a one‑word order and also rejected a subsequent re

U.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANOTHERversusTHE LABOUR COURT (I) U.P., KANPUR AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 1436 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The second respondent, a former coolie of the Kanpur Electricity Supply Corporation, was retired on 31 March 1979 upon attaining the age of 58. He claimed the retirement was invalid because the original service conditions, under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, did not prescribe an age of superann

KOSHAL KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.versusSTATE OF J. & K. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 776 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the admission process to the Regional Engineering College, Srinagar, alleging that the viva‑voce test, its method of questioning and the allocation of 15 marks were arbitrary and could affect merit. The selection procedure required candidates to appear for a written entrance exam (85 marks) a

HARI SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 786 April 1984Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 8 January 1980 to acquire 60 plots of land for a market yard, simultaneously exempting the proceedings from Section 5‑A by an order under Section 17(4). A subsequent notification under Section 6 authorised the Colle

TARAPORE & COMPANYversusCOCHIN SHIPYARD LTD. COCHIN & ANR.

1984 INSC 556 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Tarapore & Co. entered into a works contract with Cochin Shipyard Ltd. for the construction of a building dock, which included a clause (Clause 40) referring all disputes to a sole arbitrator. The contractor later claimed compensation for the increased cost of imported pile‑driving equipment and technical know‑how, and

LAKSHMI KANT PANDEYversusUNION OF INDIA

1984 INSC 266 February 1984Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed by advocate Laxmi Kant Pandey, seeking to restrain private agencies from sending Indian children abroad for adoption and to direct the Union, the Indian Council of Social Welfare and the Indian Council of Child Welfare to fulfill their duties. Relying

SILIGURI MUNICIPALITY & OTHERSversusAMALENDU DAS & OTHERS

1984 INSC 76 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Siliguri Municipality sought to levy a graduated consolidated rate on the annual value of its holdings under the Bengal Municipal (Amendment) Act, 1980. The Calcutta High Court, invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226, issued an interlocutory order staying the municipality's recovery of the tax. The municipalit

GAMON INDIA LIMITEDversusNIRANJAN DASS

1983 INSC 1885 December 1983Dismissed

Niranjan Dass, a senior clerk of Gammon India Ltd., was served notice of termination on the ground of a recession in business, effective 14 October 1967. The dispute was referred to an Industrial Tribunal, which held that the termination was an illegal retrenchment and declared Dass to remain in service with entitlemen

CHHEDI RAMversusJHILMIT RAM & OTHERS

1983 INSC 1895 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1979 Uttar Pradesh Vidhan Sabha election for a Scheduled Caste reserved seat, Jhilmit Ram was declared elected by a margin of 373 votes over Chhedi Ram. A third candidate, Moti Ram, whose caste status made him ineligible for the reserved constituency, had his nomination improperly accepted and secured 6,110 vote

S. ANBALAGANversusB. DEVARAJAN & ORS.

1983 INSC 1905 December 1983Dismissed

The appellant S. Anbalagan challenged the election of B. Devarajan, who had been elected from a Lok Sabha seat reserved for Scheduled Castes, on the ground that Devarajan was a Christian by birth and therefore not a member of the Scheduled Caste. The Election Tribunal held that Devarajan was a Hindu Adi Dravida, had re

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusSMT. SHANTI DEVI ETC. ETC.

1983 INSC 1405 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned lands acquired for the Beas Dam Project that were notified in 1962‑63 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The compensation was fixed using the capitalisation method, multiplying the net annual income of the land by a "years' purchase" multiplier. The Land Acquisition Officer and the District Court

R. S. NAYAKversusA.R. ANTULAY

1984 INSC 765 April 1984Disposed off

The Supreme Court dealt with two criminal matters transferred from the Special Judge, Greater Bombay, to a sitting High Court Judge. The issues were the procedural law to be applied to the trial after transfer and who would act as public prosecutor when cognizance was taken under Section 8(1) of the Criminal Law (Amend

BHAGWAN DAS SITA RAMversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

1984 INSC 535 March 1984Dismissed

A larger Hindu undivided family (HUF) was partitioned in 1945, after which a smaller HUF (the assessee) filed voluntary returns for assessment years 1946‑47 to 1949‑50. The Revenue sought to assess the assessee under Section 34 of the Income‑Tax Act, 1922, invoking the second proviso to Section 34(3) after the four‑yea

A.C. JOSEversusSIVAN PILLAI & ORS.

1984 INSC 525 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A.C. Jose, a losing candidate in a Kerala Legislative Assembly election, challenged the election of Sivan Pillai on the ground that votes cast by electronic voting machines in 50 of 85 polling stations were illegal. The Election Commission had issued a notification permitting the use of machines, but the Representation

VINOD CHATURVEDI ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1984 INSC 545 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the alleged kidnapping and murder of Brindaban, son of PW‑1. Five persons were tried in 1973 and acquitted; a fresh investigation in 1977 led to the prosecution of Vinod Chaturvedi and co‑accused. The trial court again acquitted them, finding the eye‑witness testimony unreliable and the investigation

WORKMEN OF M/S HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD. & ORS.versusMANAGEMENT OF M/S HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.

1984 INSC 55 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose when two salesmen, who were also union office‑bearers, were disciplined and terminated by Hindustan Lever Ltd. The union claimed the dismissals were illegal and that the employer was retaliating for trade‑union activity. The employer argued that the salesmen were not "workmen" under the Industrial Disput

VINEET KUMARversusMANGAL SAIN WADHERE

1984 INSC 65 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed a suit for eviction, arrears of rent and damages against the tenant, alleging that the premises were not covered by the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 because the building was less than ten years old at the time of filing. The tenant contended that

K. L. TRIPATHIversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 1384 October 1983Dismissed

K.L. Tripathi, a Branch Manager of State Bank of India, was charged with irregularities in issuing letters of credit and alleged misconduct. An internal investigation under the SBI (Officers and Assistants) Service Rules led to a charge‑sheet, after which he was given a personal hearing but not the opportunity to cross

MOHD. YUNUSversusMOHD. MUSTAQIM & ORS .

1983 INSC 1394 October 1983Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the sale of a property executed against a judgment-debtor. The sale was ordered by a Subordinate Judge after the surety of the judgment-debtor failed to deposit the required amount and subsequently died. The surety's alleged h

BABULAL NAGAR AND ORS.versusSHREE SYNTHETICS LTD. & ORS.

1984 INSC 1054 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, five trade‑union workmen of Shree Synthetics Ltd., were dismissed after a domestic enquiry that found them guilty of assaulting a co‑worker. They challenged the dismissal before the Labour Court under Section 61 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960, which upheld the enquiry. The Industri

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusZAVAD ZAMA KHAN

1984 INSC 1064 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was detained under the National Security Act, 1980, and made a representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution, which was forwarded to the Advisory Board. He also filed a separate representation for revocation of his detention under section 14 of the Act to the Prime Minister. The Central Governme

UNION OF INDIA & ANRversusAVTAR SINGH & ANR .

1984 INSC 754 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the Punjab Refugees (Registration of Land Claims) Act, 1948 and the scope of the Central Government's revisional power under its Section 33. Harnam Singh, a displaced person, and his family had obtained land allotments which were later challenged. The Central Government first sent a D.O. letter on 31

RAM SARUPversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1984 INSC 1003 May 1984Dismissed

Ram Sarup was appointed as a clerk by the Loharu Panchayat Samiti in 1963 and later promoted to Head Clerk on an ad‑hoc basis in 1974 and regularised in 1975. The Haryana Amendment Act of 1973 deleted Section 33 of the Punjab Panchayat Samitis and Zilla Parishads Act, which had empowered the Samiti to make appointments

STATE OF U. P.versusSURESH CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA & ORS

1984 INSC 1013 May 1984Dismissed

In 1967, court staff removed used court‑fee stamps from old High Court files and reused them in new cases, prompting an investigation that led to charge‑sheets under sections 262, 263, 467, 471, 380, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The accused contended that the offences under sections 467, 471 and 120B IPC fell

DULAREY LODHversusTHE IIIRD ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, KANPUR & ORS.

1984 INSC 1043 May 1984Dismissed

The landlord obtained a decree for ejectment against the tenant in 1973, but the decree was held inexecutable under Section 9 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. The tenant raised a jurisdictional objection, and the execution petition was dismissed. The Uttar Prade

INDER PAL GUPTAversusTHE MANAGING COMMITTEE, MODEL INTER COLLEGE, THORA

1984 INSC 1023 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Inder Pal Gupta was appointed as principal of Model Inter College, Thora on probation in 1967, with the probation period later extended by one year. In April 1969 the Managing Committee, citing a manager’s report, resolved to terminate his services and, with the District Inspector’s approval, issued a termination lette

SMT. RAJ RANIversusCHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER DELHI AND ORS.

1984 INSC 1033 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Nanak Chand, a displaced person from West Pakistan, disappeared in December 1954. His brother Dewan Chand claimed that Nanak Chand had died and produced a death certificate issued by respectable persons of the place where the family had resided. The Additional Settlement Commissioner, relying on that certificate, subst

GAYA PARSHAD DIKSHITversusDR. NIRMAL CHANDER & ANR.

1984 INSC 23 January 1984Dismissed

The appellant, Gaya Parshad Oikshit, continued to occupy certain rooms after his licence to occupy the premises was terminated by the licensor, Dr. Nirmal Chander. The licensor filed a suit for recovery of possession, and the appellant claimed title by adverse possession under Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Th

V. S. RAHI AND ANR.versusSMT. RAM CHAMBELI

1984 INSC 33 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord, Smt. Ram Chambeli, obtained permission under Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act to lease her premises for three years by making false statements about her need for the property and the condition of her family. After the lease term, she sought possession, but the tenants contested, alleging that the

AMAR KANT CHOUDHARYversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 43 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A.K. Choudhary, a Deputy Superintendent of Police in Bihar, sought promotion to the Indian Police Service (IPS) cadre. The Selection Committee excluded him in 1976, relying on adverse entries in his confidential roll for 1973-74 and 1974-75, which were communicated to him only after the decision and later expunged by t

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.versusLAL CHAND & ORS

1984 INSC 992 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana auctioned a licence to vend country liquor; the highest bidders, Lal Chand and others, were provisionally accepted but failed to deposit the required security and later argued that a neighbouring Punjab licence breached inter‑state conditions. The State re‑auctioned the licence at a lower price and

MANMOHAN KALIAversusYASH & OTHERS

1984 INSC 742 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the 1980 Assembly election for Jullundur Cantt., where the appellant, Manmohan Kaula, lost to respondent Yash by a narrow margin. Kaula alleged that Yash and his agents committed a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, by publishing false statements link

DIWAKAR SHRIVASTAVA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

1984 INSC 252 February 1984Dismissed

The appellants challenged the relaxation granted to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates regarding minimum qualifying marks for admission to Madhya Pradesh medical colleges, arguing that unfilled reserved seats should be transferred to the general category and that they should be admitted. The Supreme Court h

MITHILESH KUMAR PANDEYversusBAIDYANATH YADAV AND ORS .

1984 INSC 12 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1980 Bihar assembly election, M.K. Pandey was declared elected and the defeated Baidyanath filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices. The petition copy served on Pandey contained numerous errors, including omitted and incorrect names of alleged perpetrators. Pandey argued that the mandatory requireme

A. L. KALRAversusTHE PROJECT & EQUIPMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED

1984 INSC 971 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A.L. Kalra, a former Deputy Finance Manager of the Project & Equipment Corporation of India Ltd., was disciplined for allegedly misusing two advances granted under the corporation's House Building and Conveyance Advance Rules. The corporation withheld his salary and, after a disciplinary inquiry that lacked reasons and

LIBERTY OIL MILLS & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS.

1984 INSC 981 May 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of a series of "abeyance circulars" issued under clause 8B of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955, which placed the licence applications of Liberty Oil Mills and 60 other concerns in abeyance pending investigation into alleged illegal import of beef tallow. The petitioners contende

V. S. TALWARversusPREM CHANDRA SHARMA

1984 INSC 501 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord sought eviction of the tenant under Section 14(1)(c) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, alleging that the premises were let for a composite residential and office purpose, which would disqualify the tenancy from protection. The lease deed contained a clause stating the premises were to be used for "Resid

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