Judgments of 2005

The widow of a deceased government employee and her son applied for a compassionate appointment under the Department of Posts scheme. The authorities rejected the application after an enquiry found the family living together, despite a certificate from a Member of Parliament stating the employee lived separately. The O…

A.P. Paper Mills Ltd., a paper manufacturer, bought hardwood from unregistered dealers through agents who were paid a lump sum covering the cost of the wood, transportation charges and the agents' commission. The Commercial Tax Officer assessed sales tax on the total amount paid, invoking Section 6‑A of the Andhra Prad…

The State of Uttar Pradesh seized a tanker operating under a national permit for failing to pay the additional tax required under the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997, and ordered the owner to pay the tax plus a ten‑times penalty under Section 10(3). The owner challenged the penalty as unconstitutional, …

The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from the acquisition of land for a road project in Himachal Pradesh, where possession was taken in 1968 but formal acquisition under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was delayed. A 1985 public‑interest writ directed the State to complete acquisition and to pay the…

The Supreme Court considered two appeals arising from Labour Court awards that reinstated conductors of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation without back wages. The key questions were whether such reinstatement implied continuity of service and whether the employees were entitled to notional increments f…

The respondent, a medical officer appointed by the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, failed to take charge of a posting on 15 July 1988 and remained absent without authorization. A show‑cause notice was issued, no reply was recorded, and his services were terminated effective 16 July 1988. The employee claimed h…

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity and practical effect of numerous amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) made by the 1999 and 2002 Amendment Acts. It held that the requirement of filing an affidavit under Section 26(2) and Order VI Rule 15(4) imposes additional responsibility on deponents…

Mis. Vadilal Chemicals Ltd. set up a small‑scale unit in Medak to produce liquor ammonia and to refill anhydrous ammonia into cylinders. It obtained a final eligibility certificate under the 1993 Government Order granting a five‑year sales‑tax holiday. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (DCCT) later issued pre…

The Supreme Court entertained a public interest writ petition under Article 32 seeking mandamus to compel the Union and State governments to enforce the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 more effectively. The petitioners alleged that despite the enactment of the Act and its amendments, the provisions and rules were not being…

The appellant, a supplier, issued a cheque to the respondents for goods supplied, which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. After the first dishonour, the appellant served a legal notice demanding payment; the cheque was presented again at the respondents' request and dishonoured a second time, followed by a sec…

Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. manufactured parts of locomotive wagons and rolling stock at its Growth Shop in Adityapur and transferred them to its main plant in Jamshedpur for repair and maintenance of transport equipment used within the factory. The assessee claimed exemption under Notification No. 281/86, which exemp…

The appellant Pratap Singh was charged with offences allegedly committed on 31‑12‑1998 and was produced before the Juvenile Court in 2000. The key issues were whether the age of a juvenile offender should be reckoned as of the date of the offence or the date of production before the court, and whether the Juvenile Just…

The appellants challenged a direction of a Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court who, while remanding a land dispute to the Ankola Taluk Land Tribunal, ordered that occupancy rights be granted to the respondents. No stay was sought, and the Tribunal proceeded to grant the occupancy rights as directed. The appellants…

The petitioners challenged the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) under Article 32, alleging that its cancellation of a television rights tender violated their fundamental rights and that the Board should be treated as a "State" within the meaning of Article 12, making it subject to judicial review. The Court…

The landlord let an apartment to a tenant in 1975. The tenant later shifted to another residence in 1981, but the tenant's husband's cousin continued to occupy the original premises. The landlord filed an eviction suit under Sections 13(1)(e) (sub‑letting) and 13(1)(k) (non‑use) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging H…

The appellant V.D. Chaudhary challenged a bail order granted by the Allahabad High Court to the accused (respondent No.2) for offences under Sections 304 and 338 IPC, alleging that the High Court had not given reasons and that the bail was being used to delay the trial. The case originated from a FIR alleging shooting …

Natwar Parikh & Co. Ltd., a transporter of heavy equipment, used tractors (registered as non‑transport vehicles) coupled with trailers (registered as transport vehicles) to move transformers into Karnataka. The Karnataka taxation authority issued demand notices demanding motor‑vehicle tax on the tractor‑trailer combina…

Shatrusail Ya Digvijay Singh Jadeja filed declarations under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, which the Income Tax Department rejected. The Gujarat High Court held the declarations competent, ordered the Designated Authority to determine the amount payable under Section 90, and additionally directed the appellant t…

The respondent‑assessee, Shatrusail Ya Digvijay Singh Jadeja, had tax assessments for years 1984‑85 to 1991‑92 under the Income Tax Act and the Wealth Tax Act, which were appealed but dismissed in 1992‑93 for failure to pre‑deposit tax. After the Finance (No.2) Act, 1998 introduced the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme (effect…

Central Coalfields Ltd., a government company engaged in coal mining, was directed by the Certificate Officer to pay surface rent for coal‑bearing areas under the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914. The company contended that, pursuant to the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, the…

The State of Nagaland filed an application for leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the CrPC against the acquittal of Lipok AO and others. Because the application was filed 57 days after the limitation period, the State sought condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Gauhati High Court r…

The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against Mis. Aka Y Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd., which claimed deductions from assessable value for special packing, turnover tax, octroi, and bought‑out items while the assessable value was based on the selling price to a related person under proviso (iii) of Sec. 4(1)(a) of the Cent…

The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the Tribunal’s order allowing Mis Akay Cosmetics (P) Ltd. to deduct seven categories of expenditure from the assessable value of its instant hair‑colour product for the period 1988‑1993. The Tribunal had remanded the question of whether Akay Cosmetics and its sole dis…

The Supreme Court considered two products of Dabur Ltd., ‘Janam Ghunti’ and ‘Lal Tail’, for classification under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Tribunal had remitted the classification of ‘Janam Ghunti’ to the original authority, noting that its nature as an aqueous distillate, solution or extraction required…

The Commissioner of Central Excise appealed against the classification of grey cotton canvas cloth, belting and duck manufactured by Simplex Mills Co. Ltd. The issue was whether these goods should be taxed under tariff headings 52.02/54.08 (non‑made‑up goods) or under heading 59.09/59.11 (made‑up goods for industrial u…

Harbans Kaur and Mitta Singh assaulted Sham Singh, inflicting grievous injuries that later caused his death. The victim’s father Piara Singh and wife Sito, who were relatives of the accused, testified as eyewitnesses; the FIR was lodged after a short delay. The trial court convicted the appellants under Sections 323, 3…

The appellant Kamesh Panjiyar was convicted under Section 304‑B IPC for the dowry death of his wife, Jaikali Devi, and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment, later reduced to seven years by the High Court. He appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that there was no live link between the alleged dowry demand …