Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

N L UNTWALIA

43 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA AND OTHERSversusKELA DEVI AND ANOTHER

1979 INSC 22831 October 1979Dismissed

The original owner, Nathi, held about 46 acres, exceeding the permissible 30 acres, and the Collector declared 6 acres and 8 standard units as surplus under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, allotting them to other tenants. After Nathi's death, his widow Kela Devi and mother Manda, each inheriting half of

PARBATI DEVI & ORS.versusMAHADEO PRASAD TIBREWALLA

1979 INSC 13631 July 1979Dismissed

In a money suit based on a mortgage, a consent decree was passed and the decree-holder assigned his interest to Mahadeo Prasad Tibrewalla. After part‑payment, one judgment‑debtor died and his heirs were substituted. A 1953 consent order quantified the debt and prescribed satisfaction by conveyance of mortgaged houses,

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusM. J. SIDDIQUI AND ORS.

1980 INSC 5931 March 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the fixation of inter‑se seniority after the merger of Uttar Pradesh’s Provincial Medical Service (PMS) I and II into a single Pradeshik Medical Service. The appellants were direct recruits to PMS I appointed on a temporary basis before the merger, while the petitioners were officers promoted from th

AVTAR SINGH & ORS.versusJAGJIT SINGH & ANR.

1979 INSC 12927 July 1979Dismissed

The appellants, three sons of the deceased Balwant Singh, sued respondent No.1, who claimed to be a fourth son, for a share of the estate. The civil court first hearing (Suit No. 41 of 1958) held it lacked jurisdiction and returned the plaint to the revenue court. The revenue court also declined jurisdiction, prompting

SITARAM KASHIRAM KONDAversusPIGMENT CAKES & CHEMICALS MFG. CO.

1979 INSC 13027 July 1979Appeal(s) allowed

Sitaram Kashiram Konda, a former employee of Pigment Cakes & Chemicals Mfg. Co., filed a suit seeking declaration of illegal dismissal, reinstatement, and compensation. The trial court held the matter was an industrial dispute beyond civil jurisdiction; the First Appellate Court reversed, deeming it civil. The Bombay H

UNION OF INDIAversusR. B. CH RAGHUNATH SINGH & CO.

1979 INSC 13127 July 1979Dismissed

The Union of India appealed against R.B. Ch. Raghunath Singh & Co. under the Arbitration Act, 1940, seeking appointment of an arbitrator after the designated Director of Storage post was abolished and the Chief Commissioner refused to act. The issue was whether the court could fill the vacancy under Section 8(1)(b) of

ASSISTANT TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER (ADMINISTRATION), UTTAR PRADESH & ORSversusSRI NAND SINGH

1979 INSC 13227 July 1979Dismissed

Sri Nand Singh applied for exemption from motor vehicle tax under Section 15 of the U.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. The Taxation Officer rejected his application by a letter dated 20 October 1964, which was communicated through the Regional Transport Authority and received by the respondent on 29 October 1964. The qu

DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE AND ANOTHERversusK. 0. KRISHNASWAMY

1979 INSC 22326 October 1979Dismissed

The Enforcement Directorate imposed a Rs. 3 lakh penalty on two exporters for over‑invoicing export values to obtain import licences under an export promotion scheme. The exporters pleaded guilty and challenged the penalty before the High Court, which held that Section 12(2)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1

NARENDRA BAHADUR TANDONversusSHANKERLAL (SINCE DECEASED) BY LRS. AND ANR.

1980 INSC 1025 January 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The original owners of a plot in Saharanpur granted a permanent, transferable lease to Patel Mills Ltd. The company went into voluntary liquidation and its liquidator sold the lease‑hold interest to Benaras Bank Ltd., after which the company was dissolved under the Companies Act, 1913. The bank later entered liquidatio

DERA PHALAULIversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS .

1979 INSC 12524 July 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged a notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 that directed the Governor to exercise power under Section 17(4) on the ground of urgency and to dispense with the provisions of Section 5A (Section SA). The Supreme Court examined whether the conditions for invoking Sectio

ODURU CHENCHULAKSHMAMMA AND ANR.versusDUVVURU SUBRAMANYA REDDY

1979 INSC 21723 October 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned lands in Chittoor district that were transferred to Andhra Pradesh but remained governed by the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948. After the Act, a Settlement Officer awarded a ryotwari patta to Challamma, the plaintiff, while the land had earlier been sold to Pocha

BANWARI LALversusTIRLOK CHAND & OTHERS

1979 INSC 22023 October 1979Dismissed

Banwarilal claimed to be the adopted son of Govind Ram and sought to inherit properties bequeathed to him in two wills, while Tirlok Chand contested the adoption and the validity of the wills. The trial court and the first appellate court held the wills valid and accepted the adoption based solely on the recital in the

SHRI DIGVIJAY WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. ETC.versusMAHENDRA PRATAPRAI BUCH ETC.

1980 INSC 13223 July 1980

The Supreme Court considered two appeals by employers challenging the calculation of gratuity under Section 4(2) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The employers had computed the fifteen days' wages component as half of the employee's monthly salary, assuming a 30‑day month, while the employees argued that monthly w

ANNA TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD.versusREGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, DHARMAPURI & ORS.

1980 INSC 13123 July 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Balakrishna Bus Service, a private operator, applied for renewal of its permit which was due to expire on 9 October 1974. Anna Transport Corporation objected and applied for its own permit. While the renewal application was pending, the respondent obtained a stay by filing a writ challenging Rule 155A of the Motor Vehi

ABDUL QADIRversusMANAGING OFFICER CUM ASSIT. CUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY, JAIPUR & ORS.

1979 INSC 21622 October 1979Dismissed

Abdul Qadir bought a house in 1948, which was later declared evacuee property in 1951 despite neither he nor the seller being evacuees. He applied under Section 16 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 and obtained a restoration certificate on 27‑10‑1956, issued under the pre‑amendment procedure. The Assi

ARVIND @ ABASAHEB GANESH KULKARNI & ORS.versusANNA @ DHANPAL PARISA CHOUGULE & ORS.

1980 INSC 922 January 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The mortgagor Parisa Chougule executed two possessory mortgages in favour of Ganesh Dattatraya Kulkarni and later a simple mortgage. After his death, his adult son Bhupal, acting as manager and guardian, sold four of the ten mortgaged lands to the mortgagee for Rs.3050, the amount largely covering the mortgage debts. T

HARISH CHANDRA NIGAMversusSTATE OF U.P.

1980 INSC 821 January 1980Case Partly allowed

Harish Chandra Nigam and Amar Singh were allotted industrial plots on a provisional basis in 1956, but the provisional allotments were cancelled in 1962. Before eviction could be effected, the District Magistrate requisitioned the plots under section 29 of the Defence of India Act, 1962, and took possession from the ap

BABU NOORUL HASAN KHANversusRAM PRASAD SINGH & ORS.

1979 INSC 21318 October 1979Dismissed

The ex‑Zamindars of a village claimed that lands given on Theka to the respondents in 1948 became their exclusive Sir and Khudkasht and should be recorded as Bhoomidars after the Zamindari vested under the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The respondents contended that they had become Sirda

THAKORESHRI NAHARSINGHJI DOLATSINGHJI & 2 ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

1979 INSC 15217 August 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, former proprietary jagirdars of Idar State, claimed that after the Bombay Merged Territories and Areas (Jagirs Abolition) Act, 1953 they became occupants of their lands and were therefore entitled to the forest trees standing there. The High Court had held that, because no survey settlement under the B

STTE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSHANKER LAL & ORS.

1980 INSC 516 January 1980Dismissed

Six lecturers and teachers employed by the Municipal Council of Sagar were transferred by the State Government to schools under another municipal council under the power granted by section 94(7) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961. They challenged the transfers, arguing that the statute only permitted transf

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KERALA, ERNAKULAMversusV.DAMODARAN,TRIVANDRUM

1979 INSC 20915 October 1979Case Partly allowed

The Managing Director of R.K.V. Motors & Timber Ltd withdrew sums which the Income Tax Officer treated as dividend under section 2(6A)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1922. The dispute centered on whether "accumulated profits" for dividend liability includes the company's current year profits and whether tax and dividend pro

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL-II, CALCUTTAversusKALYANJI MAVJI & COMPANY

1980 INSC 214 January 1980Dismissed

Kalyanji Mavji & Co., a coal mining firm, owned several collieries, one of which (South Samia Colliery) was requisitioned by the military from 1942 to 1955. During the occupation the firm paid surface rent, royalty and watch‑ward salaries, which were allowed as business expenses. After the colliery was derequisitioned,

C. I. T., WEST BENGAL III, CALCUTTAversusCAREW & CO. LTD.

1979 INSC 18113 September 1979Dismissed

Carew & Co. Ltd., an Indian resident company, earned income from business in India, a manufacturing business in Pakistan and incurred a loss from agricultural property in Pakistan for the assessment year 1956-57. The Income‑Tax Officer allowed a set‑off of the agricultural loss against the Pakistani manufacturing profi

COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, LUCKNOWversusD. S. BIST &. ORS.

1979 INSC 17711 September 1979Dismissed

The Commissioner of Sales Tax, Lucknow appealed against a judgment that exempted the sale of tea leaves by D.S. Bist, an agriculturist who owned tea gardens, from sales tax under the proviso to section 2(i) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. The issue was whether the tea leaves, after undergoing processes such as witheri

NIRMAL TRADING COMPANYversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL (CALCUTTA)

1979 INSC 20010 October 1979Dismissed

Nirmal Trading Co., a dealer in paper products, incurred a loss of Rs.1,03,688 from a series of sale‑purchase transactions that were settled only by the exchange of delivery orders and cheque payments, with no evidence of actual delivery of goods. The Revenue argued that these were "speculative transactions" under Expl

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

1979 INSC 20110 October 1979Dismissed

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

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

1979 INSC 20210 October 1979Dismissed

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

SUPERINTENDENCE COMPANY OF INDIA (P) LTD.versusKRISHAN MURGAI

1980 INSC 1249 May 1980Dismissed

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

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

1980 INSC 699 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

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

STATE OF GUJARATversusGUJARAT REVENUE TRIBUNAL & ORS.

1979 INSC 1458 August 1979Dismissed

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

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

1980 INSC 1158 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

1979 INSC 2317 November 1979Appeal(s) allowed

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

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

1980 INSC 1087 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALAversusAMBAT ECHUKUTTY MENON

1979 INSC 1736 September 1979Dismissed

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

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusVEERAPPRA SABOJI AND ANR.

1979 INSC 1746 September 1979Appeal(s) allowed

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

CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTYversusKAMLAVATI AND SHRI JAI GOPAL MEHRA

1979 INSC 1715 September 1979Dismissed

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

ANAND NARAIN SHUKLAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1979 INSC 1402 August 1979Dismissed

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

INDU BHUSHAN GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1979 INSC 1381 August 1979Dismissed

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

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

1980 INSC 1021 May 1980Dismissed

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

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