Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 1985

381 judgments, newest first — showing 201–381.

POKAR RAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR

1985 INSC 9317 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

On 23 August 1983 Bhanwaria, the son of Pokar Ram, was shot and later died, leading to an FIR under sections 307, 447, 149, 148, 379 and 827 IPC, and subsequently an offence under section 302 IPC was added. The accused, Chandan Singh, was not arrested until 29 September 1983, when he applied for anticipatory bail under

MC DOWELL & COMPANY LIMITEDversusTHE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

1985 INSC 9217 April 1985Dismissed

McDowell & Company Ltd., a licensed liquor manufacturer in Hyderabad, paid sales tax on its turnover excluding the excise duty that buyers paid directly to the excise authorities. The Commercial Tax Officer issued a notice to include that excise duty in the company's turnover for sales tax purposes, relying on amendmen

RAMESH CHANDversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

1985 INSC 517 January 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Ramesh Chand was convicted under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Om Prakash based on the prosecution's claim that he, along with two others, stabbed the victim at night near Hindon Bridge and was found with a blood‑stained knife. The defence argued that Chand was merely the taxi driver, t

SHIV RATAN MAKLM S/O NANDLAL MAKLMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 25016 December 1985Dismissed

Shiv Ratan Makhlam was intercepted at the India‑Nepal border in November 1984 and two pieces of foreign‑marked gold were seized from his trousers. He was arrested, released on bail, and later, in April 1985, the Government issued a detention order under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention o

GENERAL LABOUR UNION (RED FLAG) BOMBAYversusB. V. CHAVAN AND ORS.

1984 INSC 21416 November 1984Disposed off

The General Labour Union (Red Flag) Bombay filed two complaints alleging that the employers, Delta Wires Pvt. Ltd. and Delta Spokes Manufacturing Co., had imposed a lock‑out in violation of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1

K.M. MOHAMAD ABDUL KHADER FIRMversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

1984 INSC 19416 October 1984Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, 1976 (Act II of 1976) which amended the 1970 Act by introducing graded tax rates based on taxable turnover and prohibiting the passing on of the tax to consumers. They argued that the amendment exceeded the State’s legisl

RATTAN LAL & ORS. ETC.ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1985 INSC 17716 August 1985Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the Haryana State Government’s practice of repeatedly appointing teachers on an ad‑hoc basis at the start of each academic year and terminating them before the next summer vacation, thereby denying them regular service benefits. The Supreme Court examined whether such a policy violated the eq

GOA, DAMAN AND DIU BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATIONversusKUMARI HEMA LAAD AND ORS.

1984 INSC 14416 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A batch of students filed writ petitions challenging clauses (1) and (2) of Rule 37 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Rules, 1975, which barred inspection and re‑valuation of answer books. The Bombay High Court, relying on its earlier decision in Paritosh Bhupesh Kumarsheth v. Maharasht

RENUSAGAR POWER COMPANY LTD.versusGENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY AND ANR.

1984 INSC 14516 August 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a suit filed by Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. seeking a declaration that three claims (unpaid regular interest, delinquent interest, and compensatory damages) were beyond the scope of an arbitration clause could be stayed under Section 3 of the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement)

SUDARSAN CHITS (I) LTD.versusO. SUKUMARAN PILLAI & ORS .

1984 INSC 14316 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Sudarsan Chits (India) Ltd. was ordered to be wound up under the Companies Act, 1956, but the High Court held the winding‑up order in abeyance while a scheme of compromise was being implemented. The company sought a direction that the provisional liquidator file claim petitions under section 446(2)(b) to recover debts

STATE OF GUJARATversusRAGHUNATH VAMANRAO BAXI

1985 INSC 8916 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Income Tax Officer, was tried and convicted by a Special Judge for accepting a bribe of Rs.12,500 under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The prosecution relied on the testimony of two panch witnesses (postal off

BHAGIRATH & ORSversusDELHI ADMINISTRATION

1985 INSC 8816 April 1985Case Allowed

The appellants, Bhagirath and others, sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, sought to have the 14 years they had already spent in jail as under‑trial prisoners set off against their life sentences, invoking Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Delhi High Court had rejected the claim, relying on

S.A. KINI & ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 9016 April 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, senior officers of the Canara Bank Officers' Association, alleged that senior bank officials forced bank staff to collect donations and sell greeting cards for the Canara Bank Relief and Welfare Society and the Association's Trust Fund, claiming coercion and victimisation. The Bombay High Court dismiss

KAPOOR CHAND MAGANLAL CHANDERIAversusDELHI STATE (ADMINISTRATION)

1985 INSC 9116 April 1985Case Allowed

Kapoor Chand, a British citizen of Indian origin, entered India with a car under the Carnet de Passage convention and later sought an import licence, altering an affidavit by changing "for three years" to "permanently". He was prosecuted under IPC s.420 read with s.511 (cheating) and related forgery provisions, despite

ASHOK KUMAR BHATTACHARYYAversusAJOY BISWAS AND ORS.

1984 INSC 21315 November 1984Dismissed

The petitioner challenged the election of the respondent, who was the Accountant‑in‑charge of Agartala Municipality, on the ground that he held an office of profit under the Government of Tripura within the meaning of Article 102(1)(a) of the Constitution. The High Court held that the municipal post did not constitute

GOLLALESHWAR DEV AND ORS.versusGANGAWWA KDM SHANTAYYA MATH & ORS.

1985 INSC 23115 October 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned an ancient temple registered as a public trust under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. After trustees terminated the services of two licensees who refused to vacate temple premises, the trustees filed suits for declaration of title and possession. Earlier suits were dismissed for lack of written con

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusGHUSICK & MUSLIA COLLIERIES LTD.

1985 INSC 6015 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Ghusick & Muslia Collieries Ltd., pumped out percolated water from its coal mine and sold it to a neighboring glass factory, earning Rs 42,073 in 1958‑59. The State of West Bengal levied cess on this amount under Sections 6 and 72 of the Bengal Cess Act, 1880, which the company contested, claiming the w

RAM PYAREversusRAM NARAIN & OTHERS

1985 INSC 2715 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The vendor, Matbar Mal, who held sirdari rights, deposited the amount required under Section 134 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act on 28 October 1961 to acquire bhumidari rights and on the same day executed a sale deed in favour of Ram Pyare. A bhumidari certificate was issued only on 30 October 1961.

SARDAR TOTA SINGHversusM/S GOLD FIELD LEATHER WORKS, BOMBAY .

1985 INSC 415 January 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Gold Field Leather Works let a building to a partnership firm, which sub‑let a shop to Manek Chand, who in turn sub‑let it to Sardar Tota Singh in 1952. Gold Field sued Manek for unlawful sub‑letting and obtained a decree for possession; Tota Singh later sued for a declaration that he was a lawful tenant and for an inj

R.P. BHATTversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1982 INSC 9714 December 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a supervisor in the Border Roads Organisation, was terminated during probation and later faced disciplinary action for desertion, resulting in removal from service under the Central Civil Services Rules. He appealed the removal to the Director-General, who dismissed the appeal without addressing the proc

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusVALLABHAPURAM RAVI

1984 INSC 17014 September 1984Dismissed

Vallabhapuram Ravi was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. While serving the sentence he was transferred by the Andhra Pradesh Government to a Borstal School under section 10‑A of the Andhra Borstal Schools Act, 1925, to remain there until he turned 23. When he was not released upon attaining that a

O.P. SINGLA & ANR. ETCversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1984 INSC 14014 August 1984Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the inter‑se seniority of promotee judges (appointed by promotion under Rule 16) and direct recruits (appointed from the Bar under Rule 5(2)) to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service. The petitioners, promotees, argued that seniority should be based on their dates of continuous officiation and that the s

UNION OF INDIAversusH.R. PATANKAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 14114 August 1984Dismissed

The first respondent, H.R. Patankar, was recruited to the IAS in 1955 and assigned the year 1956 as his year of allotment. Several officers promoted from the Gujarat State Civil Service (respondents 3‑9) were also assigned the same year of allotment but began officiating in senior posts earlier than Patankar. The Gover

J.R. VOHRAversusINDIA EXPORT HOUSE PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER

1985 INSC 2514 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant landlord created a three‑year limited tenancy for the first respondent under Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, and sought possession of the premises at the tenancy's expiry. After the tenant failed to vacate despite two registered notices, the landlord obtained a warrant of possession from t

RASIKLAL VAGHAJIBHAI PATELversusAHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER

1985 INSC 314 January 1985Dismissed

The petitioner, a former Sales Tax Inspector removed for proven misconduct, applied for a Head Clerk position with Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and falsely claimed he had resigned voluntarily, suppressing the fact of his removal. Upon discovery, he was charge‑sheeted and removed again, and his challenges before the

DEBRAJAN RAY & ORS.versusCOMPTROLLER & AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA AND ORS.

1984 INSC 21213 November 1984Dismissed

The Comptroller and Auditor General framed a 1966 scheme allowing Upper Division Clerks who had served at least 20 years, exhausted all chances to pass the Subordinate Accounts Service Examination, or were over 45, to be appointed as temporary Accountants without needing to pass the exam. The appellants, who were still

MAHARAO SAHIB SRI BHIM SINGHJI ETC. ETCversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1980 INSC 21913 November 1980Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of vacant urban land, challenged the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 on grounds that several provisions violated Articles 14, 19(1)(f) and 31(2) of the Constitution and the basic structure doctrine. The Court examined the artificial definition of "family" in s.2(f), the compensatio

RAGHBIR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1984 INSC 16913 September 1984Dismissed

Raghbir Singh was convicted in a Sessions case on 1 February 1980 for offences under Sections 307 and 459 of the IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment. While serving this sentence, he remained in judicial custody from 11 January 1980 for a separate case that later resulted in a conviction on 16 February 1981 by a

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusLALLOO & OTHERS.

1985 INSC 17413 August 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh charged Laloo and three others with the murder of Babu Jaleshwar Singh on 24 September 1974. The prosecution relied on the testimony of three eye‑witnesses (PW1‑3), corroborative statements of PW5 and PW6, medical evidence of a fatal neck wound, and a First Information Report (FIR) prepared b

DR. MUNEEB UL REHMAN HAROON AND ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR STATE AND ORS.

1984 INSC 13813 August 1984Dismissed

The petitioners, a group of medical graduates, applied for admission to the post‑graduate medical course at the Srinagar Medical College for the July 1980 semester and appeared for the entrance test, but the result was never declared and no admissions were made for three consecutive semesters (July 1980, November 1980,

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusSURENDER KOTIANKAR

1984 INSC 13913 August 1984Dismissed

The State of Karnataka appealed to the Supreme Court under Article 136 for special leave to challenge the Karnataka High Court's dismissal of its appeals against the conviction of Surender Kotiankar under Sections 408 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court had rejected the State's request for enhanced senten

THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, GUJARAT, AHMEDABADversusKANTILAL MANILAL ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 5613 March 1985Dismissed

The assessee sought to deduct wealth‑tax liabilities of Rs 22,679 (assessment year 1960‑61) and Rs 39,692 (assessment year 1961‑62) while computing net wealth for the valuation dates of 31 March 1961 and 31 March 1962. The Wealth Tax Officer rejected the claim, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed part of it, a

BRIJ MOHANversusMANGE RAM & ORS.

1985 INSC 5713 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1982 Haryana Legislative Assembly election, Brij Mohan was declared elected from Jind constituency, defeating Mange Ram. Mange Ram filed an election petition alleging that Brij Mohan had committed the corrupt practice of bribery under Section 123(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 by giving a donat

BRIJ MOHANversusSAT PAL

1985 INSC 5813 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The election petition filed by Sat Pal challenged the election of the appellant to the Haryana Legislative Assembly on the ground that the nomination paper of another candidate, Dog Ram, had been improperly rejected by the Returning Officer due to clerical errors in the part numbers of the electoral roll. The Single Ju

N. HORANGSEversusM. TSUBONGSE

1985 INSC 5913 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1982 Nagaland Legislative Assembly election, N. Horangse was declared elected over M. Tsubongse. Tsubongse filed an election petition alleging that Horangse committed corrupt practice by presenting four red waist‑coats to village leaders to induce their votes, invoking sections 123(1), 123(3A) and 123(6) of the

JAGAN NATHversusRAM KISHAN DASS AND ANR.

1984 INSC 23612 December 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed three ejectment applications against the tenant for possession of a room in Kamla Nagar, Delhi. In the first proceeding (1967) the Rent Controller ordered the tenant to pay arrears under s.14(2) read with s.15 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958; the tenant complied and the landlord withdrew the peti

S. KANDASWAMY CHETTIARversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

1984 INSC 23312 December 1984Dismissed

The tenants of several buildings owned by Hindu, Christian and Muslim religious public trusts and public charitable trusts challenged a 1976 Government of Tamil Nadu notification that exempted all such buildings from the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. They argued that Section 29 of the Act del

S. M. MAHENDRU AND COMPANY ETC.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR.

1984 INSC 23412 December 1984Dismissed

The petitioners, tenants in a building owned by an Apex Co‑operative Society, challenged a 1976 notification issued under section 29 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 which exempted all buildings owned by co‑operative societies from the Act’s provisions. They argued that the blanket exempti

WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN STEEL LTD. AND ANR.versusHINDUSTAN STEEL LTD. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 23712 December 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the dismissal of an assistant of Hindustan Steel Ltd. who was removed from service under Standing Order 32 on the ground that his continued employment was "inexpedient". The employer dispensed with the disciplinary enquiry prescribed in Standing Order 31 and did not record any specific reason

DR. BALBIR SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION, DELHI AND ORS.

1984 INSC 23512 December 1984Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined challenges by several property owners against assessments made by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The core issue was how to determine the rateable value of four categories of properties – self‑occupied, par

CHIMAN LALversusMISHRILAL

1984 INSC 21112 November 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord served a notice on 21 October 1969 demanding arrears of rent for a portion of a shop and verandah and claimed termination of the tenancy, thereafter filing an eviction suit under section 12(1)(a) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961. The tenant deposited the arrears but contested the exten

SATYAVIR SINGH AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS. ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 19612 September 1985Dismissed

The appellants, employees of the Research and Analysis Wing, were dismissed under clause (b) of the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution and Rule 19 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, without a charge‑sheet or inquiry, after a violent pen‑down strike and inti

SHEORATAN AGARWAL & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1984 INSC 16812 September 1984Dismissed

The Managing Director and Production Manager of M/s 5‑S Limited were prosecuted under the Essential Commodities Act for alleged violations of state licensing and price‑control orders. They contended that, under Section 10 of the Act, they could not be prosecuted unless the company itself was also prosecuted. The High C

A. SREENIVASA PAI AND ANR.versusSARASWATHI AMMAL ALIAS G. KAMALA BAI

1985 INSC 15612 July 1985Dismissed

A. Sreenivasa Pai executed a settlement deed in 1932 transferring two plots in Quilon to his mother‑in‑law Padmavathi Ammal. The deed stipulated that Padmavathi could enjoy the properties during her lifetime and thereafter V. Sreenivasa Pai and his descendants could hold them. After Padmavathi's death, her daughter‑in‑

PRAKASH CHANDRA MEHTAversusCOMMISSLONER AND SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA & ORS.

1985 INSC 8712 April 1985Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the preventive detention of Venilal Mehta, his daughter Pragna Mehta and son Bharat Mehta under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, alleging that the grounds of detention were not communicated in a language they understood, that their retract

SHANKER DASSversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1985 INSC 4812 March 1985Case Allowed

Shankar Dass, a cash clerk, was convicted of breach of trust and released under section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Despite the probation, the Government dismissed him from service. He challenged the dismissal, arguing that section 12 of the Probation Act barred any "disqualification" such as dismissal,

RURAL LITIGATION AND ENTITLEMENT KENDRA DEHRADUN & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1985 INSC 4912 March 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard writ petitions filed by Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra challenging the continued operation of numerous limestone quarries in the Dehradun‑Mussoorie area, alleging environmental pollution and ecological damage. The Court examined reports of two expert bodies – the Bhargav Committee and a

SANT LAL JAINversusAVTAR SINGH

1985 INSC 5312 March 1985Case Allowed

Sant Lal, a lessee of a plot of land under a ten‑year lease, granted Avtar Singh a one‑year licence to use a shed for a workshop. After the licence expired, Sant Lal terminated it and sued for a mandatory injunction to vacate the shed. Avtar Singh contended that he had purchased the entire property from the original ow

PRATIBHA RANIversusSURAJ KUMAR & ANR.

1985 INSC 5012 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Pratibha Rani, an estranged wife, filed a criminal complaint under s.406 IPC alleging that her husband Suraj Kumar, his father, brothers and brother‑in‑law had misappropriated her stridhan (dowry) worth Rs.60,000 that was entrusted to them at the time of marriage. The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed the complaint u

DR. (MRS.) SUSHMA SHARMA ETC. ETCversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

1985 INSC 5412 March 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals by temporary lecturers who challenged the Rajasthan Universities Teachers (Absorption of Temporary Lecturers) Act, 1979. The Act allowed absorption of temporary lecturers appointed on or before 25 June 1975, provided they were still in service on 12 June 1978. The petitioners argued

KARAM PAL & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF LNDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 5112 March 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, Assistants under the Central Secretariat Service Rules, 1962, challenged the select lists for promotion to Section Officer (1978‑1980) and the common seniority list, alleging that the quota for direct recruitment had broken down, the rota system could not operate, and seniority should be based on lengt

H.V. PARDASANI, ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 5212 March 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, Section Officers of the Central Secretariat Service, challenged the combined seniority list and the method of fixing inter‑se seniority between directly recruited officers and promotees, alleging that Rules 12, 13(5) and Regulation 3(3) of the Fourth Schedule were ultra‑vio​les of Articles 14 and 16 of

D.R. KOHLI AND ORS.versusATUL PRODUCTS LTD.

1985 INSC 2212 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Atul Products Ltd manufactured synthetic organic dyes (cibagenes and cibanogenes) and relied on Notification No. 180/61 dated 23 November 1961, which exempted dyes from excise duty if they were produced from other dyes on which duty had already been paid. The basic dyes used were manufactured before Item 14D of the Cen

BALKRISHAN GUPTA AND ORS.versusSWADESHI POLYTEX LTD. AND ANR

1985 INSC 2412 February 1985Dismissed

The Collector of Kanpur appointed a receiver over Swadeshi Cotton Mills Ltd. and ordered the seizure, attachment and pledge of its 10 lakh shares in Swadeshi Polytex Ltd. The Cotton Mills Company, together with four other shareholders, requisitioned an extraordinary general meeting of Polytex under s.169 of the Compani

IBRAHIM BACHU BAFAN & ANR. ETC.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS .

1985 INSC 2312 February 1985Case Allowed

The petitioners were detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. While their detention orders were pending before the Gujarat High Court, the Court quashed the orders by exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction, but the same day fresh detention orders were issu

S. GUIN & OTHERSversusGRINDLAYS BANK LTD.

1985 INSC 24911 December 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under IPC s.341 (wrongful restraint) and Banking Regulation Act s.36AD for allegedly obstructing bank officers at a Grindlays Bank branch. The Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted them in 1978. Grindlays Bank appealed; after a six‑year delay, the Calcutta High Court set aside the acquittal and

RADHU K. KAKDE OF BOMBAY INHABITANT, BOMBAYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 24711 December 1985Dismissed

The appellant challenged the applicability of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 to employees of the Canteen Stores Department (India), arguing that the department was not an "establishment" engaged in an industry under a Central Government department and thus should not fall within the exemption of Section 32(iv). The Cou

MAYA RANI PUNJversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI,

1985 INSC 24811 December 1985

Maya Rani, the assessee for assessment year 1961-62, failed to file her income‑tax return by the due date of 28 September 1961 and eventually filed it on 3 May 1962, after the Income Tax Act, 1961 had come into force on 1 April 1962. The Income Tax Officer imposed a penalty of Rs 4,060 under section 27(1)(a) of the 196

TULSI RAMversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1984 INSC 19111 October 1984Dismissed

Tulsi Ram, a vendor of edible oil, was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act after a public analyst found cottonseed oil mixed in his soybean oil. The analyst's report was forwarded to him 18 days after the prosecution was instituted, contrary to Rule 9A which requires the report to be sent "immediately

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusTULSIRAM PATEL AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 15511 July 1985Disposed off

This Constitution Bench judgment interprets the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India, which allows dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank of a civil servant without an inquiry in three exceptional circumstances: conviction on a criminal charge, when it is not reasonably practicable to hold an

KHANDELWAL METAL & ENGINEERING WORKS AND ANOTHER ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 14211 June 1985Dismissed

Khandelwal Metal & Engineering Works imported brass scrap and argued that the "additional duty" under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act was a counter‑vailing duty that could not be levied because brass scrap is not manufactured in India and that it should be treated as a "master alloy" exempted under Notification

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusA PARENT OF A STUDENT OF MEDICAL COLLEGE, SIMLA & ORS

1985 INSC 8511 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The guardian of a medical college student wrote to the Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh alleging widespread ragging and attached a letter from his son. The High Court treated the letters as a writ petition, ordered that the petitioner's identity be kept confidential, and directed the State Government to file an affida

RAM AVTAR SHARMA & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ETC.

1985 INSC 8611 April 1985Case Allowed

The petitioners, workmen dismissed after domestic enquiries, raised industrial disputes and sought reinstatement. Conciliation failed and the State of Haryana (for four workmen) and the Central Government (for one workman) refused to refer the disputes to an Industrial Tribunal under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Dis

CALCUTTA DOCK LABOUR BOARD AND ANR.versusSMT. SANDHYA MITRA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 2111 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Md. Safiur Rehman, a dock worker, died leaving a widow and son. The Calcutta Dock Labour Board sought attachment of the gratuity payable to Rehman under its scheme to satisfy a decree against the heirs. The Small Causes Court ordered attachment, overruling the Board’s objection that gratuity was exempt. The High Court

BALBIR SINGH DELHI ADMN. DELHIversusD.N. KADIAN, M.M. DELHI & ANR.

1985 INSC 24610 December 1985Disposed off

A complaint was lodged by a Special Railway Magistrate against two Delhi Police officers, Balbir Singh (Sub‑Inspector) and Ram Shankar (Constable), alleging that they tampered with search memos by adding a signature after the documents were in the court's custody. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether prosecut

HARBANS LALversusJAGMOHAN SARAN

1985 INSC 22910 October 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord Jagmohan Saran sought a declaration that a shop leased to tenant Harbans Lal was vacant under Section 12(1)(b) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, alleging that Lal had sub‑let it to Yadram and his son Madan Lal, who were not family members. The Prescribed Auth

M. P. MITTALversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1984 INSC 18910 October 1984Dismissed

The Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation (HSIDC) underwrote preference shares of Depro Foods Ltd. and the managing director of Depro Foods personally guaranteed the dividend payment, agreeing that any dues could be recovered as land revenue. When the company defaulted on a dividend of Rs 1,96,961, HSIDC inv

RADHEY SHYAM ETC. ETC.versusKALYAN MAL

1984 INSC 19010 October 1984Dismissed

The landlord sought eviction of the tenants under the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, claiming a bonafide need to demolish the building and construct a gold and silver ornaments factory. The lower courts upheld the eviction, citing sections 12(1)(f) and 12(1)(h), and the tenants contended that if the ev

M/S. SAHNEY STEEL PRESS WORKS LTD. & ANR.versusTHE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER & ORS.

1985 INSC 19410 September 1985Dismissed

M/s. Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd., a company with its registered office and factory in Hyderabad and branch offices in several other states, manufactured standard and non‑standard steel goods on orders received by its branches. The goods were dispatched from Hyderabad to the branches and then sold to customers, wi

H.D. SINGHversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 19510 September 1985Appeal(s) allowed

H.D. Singh was engaged as a daily‑wage "Tikka Mazdoor" by the Reserve Bank of India in 1974 and worked only sporadically. After passing his matriculation exam in 1975, a confidential RBI circular stipulated that such employees would be removed from the list of workers; consequently his name was struck off in July 1976

J. MOHAPATRA & CO AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER

1984 INSC 13610 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the selection of textbooks and general‑reading books for school and college libraries in Orissa, where the State formed committees that included authors whose books were under consideration. Publishers challenged the selections, alleging bias, lack of standing, and violation of natural‑justice princi

TIKA RAMversusMUNDIKOTA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL & ORS.

1984 INSC 13710 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a headmaster of a private school, was reverted to assistant teacher by the school management after a disciplinary enquiry. He appealed to the Deputy Director of Education, who set aside the management’s order on grounds of violation of natural justice and remanded the case for a fresh enquiry. The manage

K. CHANDRU ETC.ETC.versusSTAIE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

1985 INSC 15210 July 1985Dismissed

The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the State of Tamil Nadu from evicting slum and pavement dwellers in Madras without providing alternative accommodation and basic amenities. The State argued that it had a benevolent policy of providing alternate housing before demolition, citing the Tamil Nadu Slum

SAKURUversusTANAJI

1985 INSC 15310 July 1985Dismissed

The Revenue Divisional Officer declared the respondent as owner of six acres under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950. The appellant, instead of filing an appeal under section 90, pursued a writ petition which was dismissed, after which he filed an appeal before the Collector t

MAHARAJA KUMAR SOMENDRA CHAND NANDYversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

1985 INSC 15410 July 1985Dismissed

The appellant, a descendant of Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy, claimed Jagirdari rights over 41 villages granted in 1785 for the purpose of defraying expenses of deity worship, and also held zamindari rights acquired later. When the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 came into force, the State paid

OLGA TELLIS & ORS.versusBOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. ETC.

1985 INSC 15110 July 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined writ petitions filed by pavement and slum dwellers challenging the Bombay Municipal Corporation's demolition of their hutments, arguing that eviction violated their fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 19 of the Constitution. The petitioners claimed that the right to life includes the rig

ASHOK KUMAR YADAV AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 13710 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals against a Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment that had set aside the selections made by the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) for the Haryana Civil Service (Executive) and allied services. The petitioners alleged that the HPSC members were appointed on political and caste pa

MS. JORDAN DIENGDEHversusS.S, CHOPRA

1985 INSC 13810 May 1985Disposed off

The wife, a Christian from the Khasi tribe and an Indian Foreign Service officer, married a Sikh husband under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872. She filed a petition under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 seeking a declaration of nullity or judicial separation on the ground of her husband's impotence. The Delhi High

BRAHMVART SANATHAN DHARAM MAHAMANDAL KANPUR & ORS.versusPREM KUMAR & ORS.

1985 INSC 13910 May 1985Case Partly allowed

Lala Gurdin died leaving his widow and three daughters who became limited owners of his estate. The daughters partitioned the property and each made separate alienations, including three sale deeds (1901, 1914, 1915) executed by the last surviving daughter, Smt. Mewa Kuer. After her death, the sons of the other daughte

MURARI MOHAN DEBversusTHE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 8210 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Murari Mohan Deb, a Class IV forester of the Tripura Government, was compulsorily retired in 1962 by the Chief Forest Officer. He challenged the order, alleging denial of a fair hearing and violation of natural‑justice principles. The respondents contended that compulsory retirement is not a dismissal under Art. 311(2)

STATE OF PUNJABversusSRI HARDYAL

1985 INSC 8410 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab entered into a contract with Sri Hardyal for construction of bridges, containing an arbitration clause appointing the Superintending Engineer as arbitrator but fixing no time for the award. Under the Arbitration Act, 1940, the award was required within four months, a period that elapsed before the a

M/S SHENOY AND CO. REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER BELE SRINIVASA RAO STREET, BBNGALORE AND OTHERSversusTHE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE II BANGALORE AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 8310 April 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether its earlier judgment in Hansa Corporation’s case, which upheld the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979, was binding on a large group of traders who had obtained mandamus from the Karnataka High Court but whose writs were not appealed against. The petitioners argued that, because

HAR SHARAN VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

1985 INSC 210 January 1985Dismissed

Har Sharan Verma filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the appointment of K.P. Tewari as a Minister of Uttar Pradesh, contending that the Constitution, as amended by the Sixteenth Amendment (Article 173(a)), required a minister to be a member of the State Legislature. The petitioner argued that the amendme

NEPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U. P. & ORS .

1984 INSC 2079 November 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nepal Singh, a temporary Sub‑Inspector of Police, was terminated from service on the ground of alleged corruption and a second marriage without government permission, based on a circular issued by the Inspector General of Police. The termination order was issued by the Deputy Inspector General under a 19

SURENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 2089 November 1984Case Allowed

The case concerned nine seats reserved in the medical colleges of Jammu and Kashmir for candidates from Bihar. Thirty‑five applicants applied, and a merit list of seven candidates was prepared by the Controller of Examinations, which included the petitioner Surendra Kumar. The Chief Minister of Bihar, however, recommen

SAMARIAS TRADING CO. PVT. LTD.versusS. SAMUEL & ORS.

1984 INSC 2099 November 1984Disposed off

The Calcutta High Court entertained an oral application in the judge's chambers, without any written record, and issued an interim order maintaining the status quo of a liquor shop auction. The order was made without stating facts, legal questions, or reasons, and was later extended without the parties being informed.

JAVED AHMED ABDUL HAMID PAWALAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1984 INSC 2109 November 1984Case Allowed

Javed Ahmed Abdul Hamid Pawala was convicted of multiple murders and sentenced to death on 6 February 1982, with the sentence confirmed by the High Court and subsequent appeals dismissed. After a clemency petition was rejected, he filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, arguing that his young age, r

SAVITRI W/O SHRI GOVIND SINGH RAWATversusSHRI GOVIND SINGH RAWAT

1985 INSC 2279 October 1985Disposed off

The petitioner filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking maintenance from her husband, and subsequently applied for an interim maintenance order pending the final disposal of the main application. The Metropolitan Magistrate refused the interim order, stating that the Code

KIRPAL SINGH, M.L.A.versusUTTAM SINGH & ANR.

1985 INSC 2269 October 1985Disposed off

Kirpal Singh was elected to the Punjab Legislative Assembly in 1972, but his election was set aside by the Punjab and Haryana High Court because the nomination of another candidate, Basant Singh, had been improperly rejected on the ground that he was a development officer in the Life Insurance Corporation, a public sec

NIRMAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1984 INSC 1359 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Nirmal Singh, a Branch Manager of a cooperative bank, was dismissed after an inquiry into a fraudulent draft encashment. He challenged his dismissal, and the Government of Punjab referred his grievance to the Conciliation Officer, who recommended that the dispute be referred to a Labour Court. The Punjab Labour Commiss

GRAM PANCHAYAT OF VILLAGE, JAMALPURversusMALWINDER SINGH & ORS.

1985 INSC 1509 July 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a dispute between Gram Panchayats and the Central Government over the vesting of Shamlat‑deh (village common) lands after the 1947 partition. The Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1953 vested such lands in the village panchayats, while the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 vest

HIRACHAND KOTHARI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

1985 INSC 1369 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant entered into a 1951 deed of exchange with the State of Rajasthan for a plot swap, but the State failed to deliver the exchanged plot. The appellant sued for possession and compensation; interrogatories revealed the exchanged plot had been transferred to a third party and his original plot was in the Mahar

BABUBHAI & CO. & ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS

1985 INSC 809 April 1985Dismissed

The State of Gujarat issued notices under section 54 of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 and Rule 27 of the Bombay Town Planning Rules, 1955 demanding that lands occupied by Babubhai & Co. be handed over to the Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad, as the lands had vested in the corporation under section 53(a) for publ

SANT RAJ & ANR.versusO.P. SINGLA & ANR.

1985 INSC 819 April 1985Case Partly allowed

Two loaders, Sant Raj and Itwari Lal Sherya, were terminated by their employer, a foreign air‑transport company. The Labour Court held the termination to be retrenchment and illegal because the employer had not complied with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and awarded them one year's wages as compensa

STATE OF GUJARATversusDHRANGADHRA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD.

1985 INSC 799 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat (successor to the State of Bombay) sued Dhrangadhra Chemical Works Ltd. for unpaid royalty under a 1950 agreement that required payment at Rs.0-2-3 per Bengal Maund on salt sold, a minimum annual production of 50,000 tons, and a guaranteed minimum royalty if production fell short. The company argue

SHREE SAJJAN MILLS LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, M.P, BHOPAL AND ANR,

1985 INSC 2248 October 1985Dismissed

Sajjian Mills Ltd, a public limited company, incurred a statutory liability to pay gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and actuarially determined its total liability of Rs 48,59,431 for the assessment year 1973‑74. It made a provision of Rs 20 lakhs in its books, added it back in its return, and claimed a

RAM AVTARversusTHE STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)

1985 INSC 1708 August 1985Dismissed

The appellant, Ram Avtar, was charged under Section 302 IPC for allegedly strangling his wife. The trial court acquitted him, finding the circumstantial evidence insufficient, but the Delhi High Court reversed that decision and convicted him. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the chain of circumstantial evi

SMT. SAROJ RANIversusSUDARSHAN KUMAR CHADHA

1984 INSC 1348 August 1984Dismissed

The wife filed a suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking restitution of conjugal rights, and a consent decree was passed. After a year, the husband filed a petition under Section 13 for divorce, claiming that no cohabitation had occurred following the decree. The trial court held that the husband

UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARHversusM/S. AMRIT ROLLER FLOUR MILLS

1985 INSC 1478 July 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Amrit Roller Flour Mills, held a licence under the Wheat Roller Flour Mills (Licensing and Control) Order, 1957 and supplied maida, suji and rawa to permit‑holders as directed by the District Food and Supplies Officer. It was assessed for sales tax under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 for the ye

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, A.P.versusM/S. T.VEERABHADRA RAO, K. KOTESWARA RAO & CO.

1985 INSC 1488 July 1985Dismissed

The appellant, the Commissioner of Income Tax, challenged the deduction claimed by the assessee, a partnership that had taken over the business, assets and liabilities of a predecessor firm, including a debt of Rs.23,577. The assessee had paid tax on interest earned on that debt in AY 1963-64, later settled part of the

M/S. DHANPAT OIL & GENERAL MILLSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 1498 July 1985Dismissed

M/s Dhanpat Oil & General Mills, engaged in oil extraction, was served notices under the Produce Cess Act, 1966 for filing monthly returns and paying cess. At the relevant time no "Collector" (appointed only on 13 July 1970) or Appellate Authority (appointed on 21 August 1972) existed, leading the mill to argue that th

K.C. VASANTH KUMAR & ANOTHER.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

1985 INSC 1278 May 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Karnataka's reservation orders (1977, 1979) that set aside 68% of seats in professional colleges and 66% of posts in government services for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes under Articles 15(4) and 16(4). The Court held that reservation m

RAM AND SHYAM COMPANYversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 1358 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram & Shyam Co., submitted the highest bid for a minor‑mineral quarry in Haryana, but the State Government, invoking Rule 30(4) of the Punjab Minor Mineral Concession Rules, declined to confirm the bid and instead awarded the lease to a fourth respondent who had made a secret higher offer to the Chief Mi

AMRIT NAHATAversusUNION OF INDIA

1985 INSC 1298 May 1985Disposed off

Amrit Nahata filed a writ petition challenging sections of the Cinematograph Act and Censorship Rules and seeking certification of his film ‘Kissa Kursee Ka’. The Supreme Court ordered the film’s negatives and prints to be preserved and screened before five judges, but the film was not made available. The Solicitor Gen

BANWARI LAL KOTIYAversusP.C. AGGARWAL

1985 INSC 1348 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a member of the Delhi Stock Exchange, sued the non‑member respondent for Rs. 5,923 arising from share transactions. Each contract note bore a wide‑ranging arbitration clause referring disputes to the Exchange’s Rules, Regulations and Bye‑laws, specifically Bye‑law 247 which provided for a reference to tw

SMT. VIJAY LAXMI GANGALversusMAHENDRA PRATAP GRAG

1985 INSC 1308 May 1985Dismissed

The appellant-landlady sued the respondent-tenant for possession of a premises, alleging arrears of rent of Rs.3,960 at a rate of Rs.360 per month and that the property fell within the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. The tenant contended the rent was only Rs.125 per m

LILA KRISHANversusMANI RAM GODARA & ORS

1985 INSC 1318 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

In a 1983 by‑election for the Fatehabad Assembly constituency, Lila Krishan was declared elected, but two rival candidates, Mani Ram Chapola and Raj Tilak, had their nomination papers rejected because the serial numbers of their proposers were shown as 126 and 177 instead of the correct 26 and 77. The Punjab & Haryana

SYRYA NARAIN YADAV & ORS.versusBIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS.

1985 INSC 1328 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Bihar State Electricity Board (BSEB) recruited a group of engineers as apprentice/trainee engineers in 1977, promising that after completing a one‑year training they would be absorbed as regular Assistant or Junior Engineers on a provisional basis, with a two‑year probation and seniority based on inter‑se ranking.

UMED SINGH RAOversusMANI RAM GODARA & ORS

1985 INSC 1338 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

In a Haryana Assembly by‑election, the Returning Officer (Umed Singh Rao) rejected the nomination papers of two candidates on the ground that the proposers' serial numbers did not match the electoral roll. The successful candidate’s election was challenged, and the Punjab & Haryana High Court held that the nomination p

DR. P. NALLA THAMPY TERAHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 1288 May 1985Dismissed

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Explanation 1 to Section 77(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which exempts expenditures incurred by political parties or other persons (other than the candidate or his agent) from being counted towards the candidate's election‑expense ceiling. The

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusSWAIKA PROPERTIES & ANR.

1985 INSC 778 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 authorized the acquisition of land in Jaipur for a public development scheme. A notice under s.52(2) was served on the respondents at their Calcutta office, and the land was later vested in the State of Rajasthan by a notification under s.52(1). The respondents filed a writ pet

M.L. JAIN & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA

1985 INSC 788 April 1985Case Allowed

M.L. Jain, a retired judge of the Rajasthan High Court, challenged the calculation of his pension under the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954. The Ministry of Law had issued a circular stating that a judge's service as a High Court Judge should be counted towards his parent service and that pension sh

PERIA NACHI MUTHU GOUNDER AND ORS.versusRAJA THEVAR (DEAD) AND ORS.

1985 INSC 208 February 1985Dismissed

Muthammal, the absolute owner of certain lands, executed a deed of settlement in 1925 endowing the properties to a family temple and appointed herself as trustee for life. In 1930 she executed a registered deed of cancellation and later alienated the properties, selling them to the father of the appellants. After her d

STATE OF BIHARversusBISHNU CHAND LAL CHAUDHARY AND ORS.

1985 INSC 18 January 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, Prithwi Chand Lall Choudhary, claimed Rs. 2,00,000 in damages alleging that the State of Bihar, through its manager J.P. Mukherjee, wrongfully took over his estate under the Bihar State Management of Estates and Tenures Act, 1949, and acted with negligence and bad faith. The trial court, treating the Act

RAM SINGH & ORS.versusCOL. RAM SINGH

1985 INSC 1697 August 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition challenging the election of Col. Ram Singh on allegations of corrupt practice, including booth‑capturing and intimidation at two polling stations in the 1982 Haryana Assembly election. The petitioners relied heavily on oral testimony and tape‑recorded statements taken by

JASWANT SINGH & ANRversusTHE CUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY, NEW DELHI

1985 INSC 1257 May 1985Dismissed

Two brothers sold a half‑interest in their ice factory to Saghir Ahmed, who later became an evacuee. After a decree for the balance of consideration, Ahmed's properties were attached and sold in execution; Jaswant Singh, a decree‑holder, purchased them. The Custodian of Evacuee Property sought to set aside the sale und

STATE OF BIHARversusBANSHI RAM MODI & ORS.

1985 INSC 1267 May 1985Disposed off

The State of Bihar granted a mining lease in 1966 for mica on 80 acres of reserved forest. During mining, the lessee discovered felspar and quartz and, in 1983, the parties executed a Deed of Incorporation to include these minerals in the existing lease. The Divisional Forest Officer barred the extraction, citing Secti

PARTAP SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

1985 INSC 1936 September 1985

Amar Singh died leaving two widows, each allotted one‑third of his agricultural land as maintenance. The petitioner, Amar Singh's adopted son, obtained one‑third from Har Kaur and sued Jagir Kaur, the other widow, for a declaration that she had no interest in the land. A 1945 compromise decree allowed Jagir Kaur to ret

SAROJ KUMAR BOSEversusKANAILAL MONDAL & ORS.

1985 INSC 1686 August 1985Dismissed

The respondents' predecessor obtained a permanent lease of a tank fishery without sub‑soil in 1914 and later, in 1952, granted an 11‑year lease of the same fishery to the appellant. Under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, the interest of intermediaries was to vest in the State from 15 April 1955. The respo

ARKAL GOVIND RAJ RAOversusCIBA GEIGY OF INDIA LTD., BOMBAY

1985 INSC 1236 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Arkal Govind Raj Rao was employed by Ciba Geigy of India Ltd. as a stenographer‑cum‑accountant, later promoted to Assistant and designated Group Leader. After his termination, the employer argued that he was not a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, claiming he performed supervisory and a

EMPIRE INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

1985 INSC 1246 May 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether processes such as bleaching, mercerising, dyeing, printing and other treatments of cotton and man‑made fabrics constitute "manufacture" under the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, and whether the 1980 amendment expanding the definition of manufacture is constitutionally valid. The Co

R. SRIHARI NAIDUversusGOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

1985 INSC 186 February 1985Dismissed

The Regional Transport Authority (RTA) initially issued a notification under s.57(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 to invite applications for stage‑carriage permits, but the RTA was later found to be improperly constituted for lacking a non‑official member as required by s.44. After being reconstituted, the RTA did n

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusNEW KWALITY SWEET HOUSE & ORS.

1984 INSC 2305 December 1984Dismissed

In 1975 a food inspector collected a 200‑gram sample of suji from the accused, although the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules required 250 g, and sent it to the public analyst, who reported excessive moisture and ash. The Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted the accused on the ground that the sample was insufficient i

EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 2385 November 1985Disposed off

The petitioners, Express Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. and others, challenged two notices: one issued by the Engineer Officer, Land & Development Office, for re-entry upon forfeiture of lease, and another by the Zonal Engineer (Building), Municipal Corporation of Delhi, for demolition of the Express Building. The petitioners al

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANDHRA PRADESHversusM. CHANDRA SEKHAR

1984 INSC 2294 December 1984Dismissed

The assessee filed voluntary income‑tax returns after the statutory deadline prescribed under s.139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Income Tax Officer levied interest under clause (iii) of the proviso to s.139(1) and treated the assessee as in default, imposing penalties under s.271(1)(a). The assessee argued that

LINGAPPA POCHANNA APPELWAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ETC.

1984 INSC 2264 December 1984Dismissed

The appellant purchased agricultural land from a tribal seller with collector's permission, but the Sub‑Divisional Officer, invoking the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974, ordered restoration of possession to the tribal buyer. The appellant appealed, arguing that sections 3(1) and 4 of the

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusSUDHIR DEY AND ANR.

1984 INSC 2274 December 1984Dismissed

The State of West Bengal filed a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 challenging a Calcutta High Court order that granted bail to the accused Sudhir Dey and others and appointed the Deputy Inspector General of the CBI as a Special Officer to investigate murder allegations. The Supreme Court noted that the petition

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. ETC.versusSAMPAT LAL & ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 2284 December 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Two young boys were found dead under mysterious circumstances in Barrackpore, West Bengal, prompting letters to the Calcutta High Court alleging police negligence and demanding an independent investigation by the CBI. The High Court, without giving notice to the State, issued a rule directing the Deputy Inspector Gener

VORA RAHIMBHAI HAJI HASANBHAI POPATversusVORA SUNDERLAL MANILAL & ANR.

1985 INSC 2364 November 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, having purchased a plot of land, leased it to the defendant for Rs.1325 per annum under a registered rent note that required payment of rent even if the premises were not used. The lease stipulated that the tenant would not sub‑let and would remove any constructions on expiry. The defendant ceased using

S.C. JAINversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1985 INSC 2374 November 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Superintending Engineer in the Haryana P.W.D., was retired prematurely at age 50 under the Governor’s order invoking rule 3.26(d) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules. He challenged the order, arguing that the special provision in rule 3.26(c) shields Superintending Engineers from such compulsory retireme

SMT. ASHA KESHAVRAO BHOSALEversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1985 INSC 2204 October 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, the wife of a man detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, challenged his detention order (s.3(1)) and subsequent declaration (s.9) before the Supreme Court under Article 32. They argued that the government’s delay in disposing a representation

H. ANRAJ ETC.versusGOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU ETC.

1985 INSC 2214 October 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether state lotteries organised by Tamil Nadu and West Bengal could be taxed under the states' sales‑tax statutes. The petitioners, dealers in lottery tickets, argued that lottery tickets are not "goods" but merely actionable claims, rendering the amendments to the Tamil Nadu General Sales

UNION OF INDIAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1984 INSC 1664 September 1984Dismissed

The State of Rajasthan, through its District Rehabilitation Officer, sued the Union of India and the Railway Administration in a district court for damages to tents damaged while in transit on Indian Railways. The Union contended that the suit was barred by Article 131 of the Constitution, which gives the Supreme Court

HARIHAR POLYFIBRESversusTHE REGIONAL DIRECTOR ESI CORPORATION

1984 INSC 1674 September 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the term "wages" under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 encompasses various allowances such as House Rent Allowance, Night Shift Allowance, Heat, Gas and Dust Allowance and Incentive Allowance. The Court held that the Act, being a social‑welfare legislation, g

DAMAN SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

1985 INSC 764 April 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of sections 13(8) to 13(11) of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961, which empower the Registrar to compulsorily amalgamate cooperative societies. Petitioners argued that the provisions violated the right to form associations under Article 19(1)(c) and were n

LAKSHMINARAYAN GUIN & ORS.versusNIRANJAN MODAK

1984 INSC 2253 December 1984Dismissed

The appellants, landlords, obtained a trial decree for possession of a house in Memari, West Bengal, on grounds of rent arrears and need for demolition. The respondent appealed, and while the appeal was pending the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 was extended to Memari, introducing Section 13 which bars possessi

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusUNITED COLLIERIES LTD. & ORS.

1984 INSC 2243 December 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed against a Bombay High Court order that had sent the dispute over a staff car of the Technical Advisor to the North Chirimiri Collieries to a civil suit. The car, purchased in 1966 and transferred to United Collieries Ltd., was claimed to be a fixed asset of the mine and therefore vested in t

THE DHARANGADRA CHEMICAL WORKSversusDHARANGADHRA MUNICIPALITY & ANOTHER

1985 INSC 1923 September 1985Dismissed

The appellant, Dharangadhra Chemicals, challenged the levy of octroi duty at an enhanced rate imposed by Dharangadhra Municipality under its Octroi Rules and Bye‑laws of 1965. The dispute centered on whether the municipal rules could be brought into force without a statutory exemption from the Saurashtra Terminal Tax a

BOMBAY HAWKERS' UNION AND ORS.versusBOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

1985 INSC 1463 July 1985Disposed off

The Bombay Hawkers' Union and several hawkers filed writ petitions under Article 32 challenging sections 313, 313‑A, 314(3) and 497 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, alleging that the provisions gave the municipal authorities unfettered power to refuse licences and remove goods without a hearing, thereby v

I.T.C. LTD. ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

1985 INSC 1213 May 1985Dismissed

The case concerned the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 and its amendments, which imposed a market fee on sellers and buyers of agricultural produce and later enhanced the fee from 1% to 2%. The petitioners challenged (i) the constitutional validity of Section 65(1) as amended and its val

MALKHAN SINGHversusSOHAN SINGH & ORS.

1985 INSC 1912 September 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Kishan Singh's agricultural land was allotted under the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act and the allotment became final under section 23. After Kishan's death, Malkhan Singh claimed to be his adopted son to inherit the land, while other claimants denied the adoption. The consolidation authorities, in mutatio

STATE OF PUNJABversusLABH SINGH AND ANR.

1985 INSC 1662 August 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Labh Singh owned 32‑8 standard acres of agricultural land, of which 7‑4 acres were mortgaged with possession before the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 came into force. The mortgagee was deemed the landowner, so Singh’s holding was treated as less than the permissible limit of 30 acres. After redeeming t

UMESH CHANDRA SHUKLA ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 1672 August 1985Case Allowed

The case concerned recruitment to the Delhi Judicial Service under the Delhi Judicial Service Rules, 1970. The High Court, after the written examination, added two marks to each candidate’s paper as a "moderation" and prepared a second list of candidates who then qualified for the viva‑voce, despite not meeting the sta

CHIRANJIT LAL ANANDversusSTATE OF ASSAM & ANR.

1985 INSC 1652 August 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a supplier of rations to the Central Reserve Police Units in Assam, was assessed sales tax for supplying "meat on hoof" under the Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947. He contended that "meat on hoof" was merely a term used by the military for live goats intended to be slaughtered for meat, and therefore fell withi

WORKMEN EMPLOYED BY INDIAN OXYGEN LTD.versusINDIAN OXYGEN LTD.

1985 INSC 1192 May 1985Case Partly allowed

The case involved workmen of Indian Oxygen Ltd.'s Kanpur unit represented by the Karamchari Union demanding an upward revision of dearness allowance linked to the consumer price index for Kanpur, while the company had unilaterally imposed a scheme linking allowance to the all‑India average CPI after a settlement with t

MUKESH ADVANIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1985 INSC 1202 May 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by Mukesh Advani on behalf of bonded labourers from Tamil Nadu working in stone quarries at Raisen, Madhya Pradesh, alleging exploitation through advance payments, piece‑rate wages below minimum, and denial of statutory protections. An investigative report and a Distr

SCIENTIFIC ENGLNEERING HOUSE (P) LTD.versusCOMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH

1985 INSC 2351 November 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Scientific Engineering House (P) Ltd. entered into two 1961 collaboration agreements with Metrimpex Hungarian Trading Company to obtain technical know‑how for manufacturing microscopes and theodolites. The foreign collaborator supplied a complete set of drawings, designs, charts, plans and related literature (the "docu

DISTRIBUTORS (BARODA) PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND TWO ORS.

1985 INSC 1431 July 1985Dismissed

Distributors (Baroda) Ltd., an investment company, claimed a deduction under Section 80M of the Income Tax Act for inter‑corporate dividends based on the full amount of dividends received, contrary to the Revenue’s view that the deduction should be calculated on dividend income as computed under the Act. The Supreme Co

HADIBANDHU RAUTARAO AND ORS ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 1441 July 1985Disposed off

The petitioners, medical graduates from Orissa, challenged a change in the admission scheme for postgraduate medical courses that required a separate entrance examination after completing a Resident House Staff appointment. They claimed the new scheme violated their fundamental right to admission under Article 32 and t

D.K. MITRA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 1451 July 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Eight petitioners, originally Assistant Medical Officers, were promoted on an officiating basis to Divisional Medical Officer posts between 1971 and 1974 under the 1965 and 1973 Railway Medical Service Rules, which treated such posts as selection posts. A seniority list prepared in 1979 under the 1978 Rules (which intr

SMT. GIAN DEVI ANANDversusJEEVAN KUMAR AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 1141 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's husband was a tenant of a shop under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. After the landlord served a notice of termination, the tenant died while still in possession as a statutory tenant. The widow and heirs claimed the right to remain in possession and the protection against eviction provided by the Act

DR. DINESH KUMAR & ORS.versusMOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE ALLAHABAD & ORS.

1985 INSC 1151 May 1985Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, who had completed their MBBS and house‑job before the Supreme Court’s June 22, 1984 judgment in Dr. Pradeep Jain’s case, were denied admission to two‑year postgraduate medical courses for 1985‑86 because the college applied the new 50% institutional‑preference rule instead of the earlier 75% rule. They

STATE OF TAMIL NADU ETC.versusRAMALINGA SAMIGAL MADAM ETC.

1985 INSC 1171 May 1985Dismissed

The State of Tamil Nadu sought to bar a civil suit filed by a religious Math seeking declaration of title and an injunction over 3.55 acres of land, arguing that the nature of the land (ryoti vs. poromboke) had already been decided by the Settlement Officer under section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conv

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.versusSHAMSHER SINGH

1985 INSC 1181 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Shamshar Singh, a practising advocate, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. He challenged the detention on four grounds: (1) a one‑day delay in placing his representation before the Advisory Board violated Section 10; (2) the Board failed to consider documentary evidence he produced, cont

ASHUTOSH SWAIN ETC. ETC.versusSTATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY & ORS.

1985 INSC 441 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The State Transport Authority of Orissa advertised for applications for all‑India tourist permits in 1974. The appellants applied directly for such permits, were granted them, and their subsequent appeals to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal were dismissed. The High Court, however, quashed the permits on the groun

BIHAR STATE HARIJAN KALYAN PARISHADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 451 March 1985Case Allowed

The Bihar State Harijan Kalyan Parishad filed a writ petition challenging two letters—one from the Ministry of Steel and Mines and another from the Steel Authority of India Ltd.—which denied reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotions by selection to Group ‘A’ posts with a salary ceiling of Rs.

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA WORKERS' UNIONversusFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 461 March 1985Case Allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) employs contract labour through contractors. Contract labourers, organized by the Food Corporation of India Workers' Union, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking departmentalisation or, alternatively, the extension of benefits under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolit

ARUN KUMAR CHATTERJEEversusSOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY & ORS.

1985 INSC 471 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a clerk transferred at his own request from the North-Eastern Railway to the South-Eastern Railway in 1958, was placed below temporary staff in the seniority list of the Sealdah Division, contrary to Rule 312 of the Railway Establishment Manual. He made representations and later filed a writ petition cha

STATE OF ORISSA & OTHERSversusTHE TITAGHUR PAPER MILLS COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

1985 INSC 431 March 1985Disposed off

The State of Orissa issued notifications under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, imposing a 10% purchase tax on bamboos and standing trees agreed to be severed. Petitioners challenged the validity of these notifications, arguing that the transactions were not sales of goods, that the tax amounted to double taxation, and

MST. SADIQUA BEGUM & ORS.versusTHE BOARD OF REVENUE, MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

1985 INSC 171 February 1985Dismissed

The appellants sought validation of land transfers under the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Act, 1950, which the Collector approved. The Commissioner, invoking section 50 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, issued a revision of the Collector’s order, which was affirmed by the Board of Revenue

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