Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jul-29-1977
Reported in : AIR1977SC2226; 1977CriLJ1897; (1977)3SCC562; 1977(9)LC546(SC)
..... , however, mohammad musheer stated: on 17-2-73 a quarrel had taken place between accused shamim and deceased nirmaljeet in course of that scuffle shamim was being beaten meantime, while mediating,someone stabbed nirmaljeet.shamim's statement in the sessions court under section 342, in this regard, was in these terms:the reason of my absconding was that on 17-2 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-21-1977
Reported in : AIR1978Mad97; (1978)1MLJ386
..... . according to the plaintiff, he and the defendant gave an undertaking to the police not to put up any new construction without settling their disputes either with the aid of mediators or through a competent court. overruling the objections raised by the plaintiff, the commissioner of virudhunagar. municipality granted permission to the defendant to put up constructions. in pursuance of that .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-04-1977
Reported in : AIR1978Mad103
..... was afflicted with leprosy, the plaintiff did not want to live with him and she resorted to questionable ways of living, which the defendant's family resented. due to a mediation effected at the instance of the relations, the plaintiff entered into full satisfaction of the decree in o. s. no. 15 of 1943 under the original of ex. b-2 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-28-1977
Reported in : AIR1978HP2
..... be at once executed, would be indulging in a mere pastime. one can easily give instances of cases in which the decrees duly passed by competent courts' cannot be im-mediately executed. but that fact has never been understood to mean that there is an implied ouster of jurisdiction of the court to entertain and dispose of the suit.' this decision .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-07-1977
Reported in : AIR1977SC1638; (1977)2SCC246; 3SCR149; 39STC378(SC); 1977(9)LC268(SC)
p.n. bhagwati, j.1. the short question which arises for determination in these appeals is whether green ginger falls within the category of goods described as 'vegetables, green or dried, commonly known as 'sabji, tarkari or sak' in item (6) of schedule 1 to the bengal finance (sales tax) act, 1941. if it is covered by this description, it would be exempt from sales tax imposed under the provisions of that act. the sales tax authorities held that green ginger is used to add flavour and taste to food and it is, therefore, not vegetable commonly known as 'sabji, tarkari or sak'. the orders of the sales tax authorities were challenged in a writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution and a single judge of the high court who heard the writ petition disagreed with the view taken by the sales tax authorities and held that green ginger is vegetable within the meaning of that expression as used in items (6) of the first schedule to the act. this view of the learned single judge was affirmed by a division bench of the high court on appeal under clause (15) of the letters patent. hence the present appeal by the state with special leave obtained from this court. 2. the bengal finance (sales tax) act, 1941 levies sales tax on the taxable turnover of a dealer computed in accordance with the provisions of that act. section sub-section (1) provides that no tax shall by payable under the act on the sale of goods specified in the first column of schedule i, subject to the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-20-1977
..... subsequent constitutional challenges to the implemented legislation, there also was to be "no dragging out" of the extraordinary federal remedy beyond the period specified in the statute. switchmen v. national mediation board, 320 u.s. at 320 u. s. 305 . since judicial review of the attorney general's page 432 u. s. 505 actions would.unavoidably extend this period, it is ..... inferred." 397 u.s. at 397 u. s. 166 . see association of data processing service orgs. v. camp, 397 u. s. 150 , 397 u. s. 157 (1970); switchmen v. national mediation board, 320 u. s. 297 (1943). that inquiry must address the role played by the attorney general within "the context of the entire legislative scheme." abbott laboratories v. gardner, supra .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-14-1977
Reported in : AIR1978MP189; 1978MPLJ527
j.p. bajpai, j.1. this second appeal is at the instance of the defendants against whom the claim of the respondent-plaintiff for possession and mesne profits has been decreed by both the courts below.2. the facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 27-6-1960, defendant no. 1 rikhiram executed a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff for a consideration of rs. 300/-. however, khasra no. 165/1 area 0.20 acres was described as the land sold. the case of the plaintiff was that the aforesaid description was under a mistake. what was actually intended to be sold and was sold was the land measuring 0.20 acres of khasra nos. 81 and 82/2. according to the plaintiff, he was also placed in possession of these khasra numbers and not of khasra no. 165/1 as stated in the sale deed. after entering into possession, his name was also mutated on these khasra numbers and the defendant rikhiram, despite notice, did not oppose the aforesaid mutation. mutation had already taken place in december 1960. thereafter, the plaintiff remained in peaceful possession of the aforesaid land for about 6 years. however, in november 1966, defendant no. 1 executed a sale deed in favour of defendant no. 2 purporting to sell 0.29 acres out of khasra nos. 81 and 82. defendant no. 2, after obtaining a sale deed dispossessed the plaintiff in november, 1966, and therefore, the plaintiff brought the present suit for possession immediately within 4 months, i. e. in march 1967.3. the case of the defendant was .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-21-1977
Reported in : ILR1977Delhi485
yogeshwar dayal, j. (1) this is a petition for revision filed on behalf of the tenant, shrimati kanta goel, under proviso to subsection (8) of section 25b of the delhi rent control act, as amended, (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') against the order of the rent controller dated 16-9-1976 under section 14a(1) of the act rejecting the application of the petitioner for leave to contest the ejectment application filed by the respondent. as a sequiter, the rent controller, passed an order on the same day stating that since the petitioner's application for leave to contest ejectment application was rejected the respondent was entitled to a decree for eviction. the petitioner was asked to hand over vacant possession of the premises to the respondent within two months of the order.(2) the eviction petition dated 3-2-1976 was filed by shri b. p.pathak (respondent) against shrimati kanta goei (petitioner) purported to be under section 14a of the act, as amended by the delhi rent control act (amendment) act, 1976. in this petition, the eviction of the petitioner was sought from the first floor of premises no. 23/6, shakti nagar, delhi. the respondent had averred in the eviction application that he is the landlord of the premises in dispute, that the premises let out to the petitioner were residential. the description of the property was also given. regarding the eviction from the first floor, it was averred that the landlord is in occupation of the central government's premises .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-15-1977
Reported in : AIR1978MP201; 1978MPLJ433
n.c. dwivedi, j.1. this is an appeal by smt. yuvrani tank rajeshwari devi, the petitioner against the decision of the district judge, bilaspur, in misc. judicial case no. 2 of 1970 decided on 24th dec. 1971 whereby her petition under section 263 of the indian succession act was dismissed.2. late raja bahadur leeladhar singh was the ex-ruler of sakti and left behind him his widow smt. indumati devi respondent no. 2, smt. rajkumari gyanda devi respondent no. 5 is the daughter of late raja bahadur leeladhar singh. yuraj jivendranath bahadur singh was the pre-deceased son of late raja bahadur leeladhar singh. he left behind him his two sons. surendra nath bahadur singh and pushpendra nath bahadur singh, respondents 3 and 4 respectively and the petitioner his widow.3. respondent no. 1 had filed a petition in the court of district judge, bilaspur for obtaining a probate in respect of a will executed by late raja bahadur leeladhar singh. this was registered as civil suit no. 3-a of 1965. the grant of probate of the will was opposed by the petitioner and respondents 3 and 4. respondent no. 3 surendra nath bahadur singh put in appearance through shri godbole, advocate of bilaspur and withdrew from the contest. on this, the probate of the will of late raja bahadur leeladhar singh was granted in favour of respondent no. 1 harilal.4. the petitioner's case is this : the petitioner and respondent no. 4 had put respondent no. 3 in charge of the proceedings in civil suit no. 3-a of 1965. in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-08-1977
Reported in : AIR1977SC2002; (1977)4SCC65; 1977(9)LC555(SC)
n.l. untwalia, j.1. there is a dharamshala situated in village kaddon, district patiala in the state of punjab. a part of the same institution was another dera or dharamshala situate at jasra tehsil near ludhiana. 2. the fact that one bishan dass, chela of prem dass was the mahant of this institution at the end of the 19th century is not in dispute. bishan dass had four chelas: (1) parmanand, (2) narain dass, (3) atma ram and (4) ram dass. although narain dass was his junior most chela, bishan dass because of his incapacity and ill-health made narain dass the mahant during his life time. shortly thereafter the other three chelas died one after the other. it appears that narain dass also died during the life time of bishan dass. one ganga ram was the chela of narian dass. ganga ram was appointed the mahant with the approval of bishandass. this fact is evidenced by the mutation order of the revenue authority passed on 10-3-1908, ext. p-2. after the death of ganga ram, sobharam became the mahant. it is not clear from the records of this case as to when ganga ram died and when sobha ram became the mahant and how. what is clear, however, is that parties are not at variance so far. sobha ram died on the 31st january, 1961 in a hospital at ludhiana. according to the case of original defendant no. 1 respondent, mal dass, sobha ram had executed a will in his favour on the 16th of january, 1961, a fortnight before his death. mal dass claimed to have been installed as a mahant in .....Tag this Judgment!