Reported in : 1988(2)BomCR507
.....were armed with axes and sticks. however, all those persons were made to return to the village by accused no. 8 gyanik (appellants no. 4) who had in fact brought them to the house of p.w. 15 manik. what happened at that time is not clear on record. but the fact remains that the family of the deceased and their associates, who were in the house of manik at that time, had become cautious. p.w. 15 manik made his son vishnu to sit on the terrace of his house to keep a vigil on the villagers. the deceased limba, govinda, hari and narayan and his associates p.w. 2 sopan and his family members remained inside in their house with p.w. 15 manik the brother of the deceased till about 2 p.m. when a riotous mob came again in front of the house of manik armed with deadly weapons like axes and sticks , evidently to teach a lesson to the four deceased and six injured p.ws, in view of their insistence on residing in the village anterweli and despite the fact that they were instructed to leave the village in view of their deeds of dacoity.5. the riotous mob was sighted by vishnu who was keeping a vigil from the terrace and had given a signal to his father p.w. 15 manik. manik saw the mob of forty.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [1988]71STC394(P& H)
.....(3) of section 36 of the act. the best judgment assessment order, annexure p/6, passed by respondent no. 4 on 15th june, 1979, therefore, ipso facto is rendered illegal. the exercise books ought to have been returned to the petitioner within the prescribed period and if at all the same were to be retained there should have been a proper approval for the same which was lacking. since the seized exercise books were not returned to the petitioner he was not in a position to render any proper and detailed explanation to the notice annexure p/3 dated 21st may, 1979. in reply to this notice in fact he simply made a protest against illegal retention of the seized exercise books vide reply, annexure p/4, and made a demand for their return vide letter annexure p/5.6. his second submission is that it was incumbent on respondent no. 4 to determine the date of liability of the petitioner for payment of sales tax under section 6(2) of the act. it was only after expiry of 30 days from the date so fixed that the sales effected by him would have become liable to payment of sales tax. this essential legal requirement has not been complied with in the impugned order, annexure p/6. this law.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 1988(2)ARBLR1(Delhi); 35(1988)DLT177
.....an entirely new case by seeking to implead the partners of the defendant firm and the distributor of the defendant firm's products. as a matter of fact by seeking to implead these persons as co-defendants the the plaintiff simply wants to have its claim or relief already set out in the plaint, to be extended even against the partners and the distributor of the defendant firm, and this can, by no stretch of imagination, be called setting up of a new case. (7) order 1 rule 10, sub-rule (5) of civil procedure code . provides as follows :- '10(5) subject to the provisions of the indian limitation act, 1877 (15 of 1877), section 22, the proceedings as against any person added as defendant shall be deemed to have begun only on the service of the summons.' (8) section 22 of the limitation act, 1908 provided that where a new plaintiff or defendant was added or substituted, the suit would, as regards him, be deemed to have been instituted when he was so made a party, meaning thereby that in cases governed by that act when a new plaintiff was substituted for the plaintiff on record after the period of limitation prescribed for that suit, it must be dismissed and if on the addition of a.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (1988)2GLR1425; (1989)ILLJ396Guj
.....shorn of all verbosity and legal niceties, this in short is the question to be examined in these petitions. 1/a. as common questions of law and facts arise, at the request of and with the consent of the parties, all the three petitions are being disposed of by common judgment and order. 2. each of the petitioners has been appointed as gate clerk on ad hoc basis by respondent no. 1-agricultural produce market committee. kalavad (hereinafter referred to as 'the committee'). sometime in the year 1981-82 there was audit objection pointing out that respondent no. 1-committee should have adopted the procedure for gate pass. hence respondent no. 1-committee made proposal for increasing its sanctioned establishment and recommended that four posts of gate clerks be created and two posts of watchman be created. pending the approval of the proposal by the director of agricultural marketing and rural finance, gandhinagar (respondent no. 2 herein), the committee made appointments of gate clerks purely on ad hoc and temporary basis and that too for a period of 29 days. the relevant orders are produced at annexures 'g/1', 'g/2', and 'g/3' and they are dated : july 12, 1983, march 22, 1984.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (1988)2GLR1115
.....and he is a dealer registered under the sales tax act. he has taken that mill on lease from its owner. the petitioner has not started any manufacturing activity and has done the business of reselling oil purchased as per his say in the petition. the registration as a dealer is with effect from-13-12-1987. on 28-3-1988, there was a raid, search and seizure by the special officer of the enforcement branch of the sales tax department at the premises of the petitioner.2. as a result of the seizure of the documents, it appeared that the petitioner had paid less sales tax as per the monthly returns and challans and thereby the petitioner appeared to evaded the sales tax. as per the returns furnished by the petitioner, the turnover of sales was only to the tune of rs. 1,25,650/- and the tax payable thereon was only rs. 6,032/- whereas as per the information collected during the seizure from the premises of the petitioner, the turnover of sales was found to the tune of rs. 3,46,29,844/- and the tax payable thereon was rs. 16,62,235/-. thus, the petitioner was said to have evaded the tax to such a huge extent. it was also stated in the letter annexure-a/l dated 31-3-1988 addressed.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [1988]174ITR326(Raj)
.....section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, is at the instance of the revenue to answer the following question of law, namely :-'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was correct in law in holding that on the death of shri prithviraj (partner), there was dissolution of the firm and the assessments should have been made by the income-tax officer ?'the relevant assessment year is 1976-77. the assessee-firm consisted of five partners, one of whom, prithviraj, died on june 26, 1975. thereafter, the remaining four partners took in the widow of prithviraj in that partnership and constituted a new partnership by a partnership deed dated july 22, 1975. the assessee filed two returns, one for the period up to the death of prithviraj and the other for the period subsequent to that date. the income-tax officer took the view that it was a case merely of a change in the constitution of the firm governed by section 187 of the act so that a single assessment for the whole year was to be made. the appellate assistant commissioner affirmed this view on appeal by the assessee. further appeal of the assessee to the tribunal has, however, succeeded. the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR1988Mad340
.....that the court must exercise its judicial discretion based upon sufficient reasons after considering all ,,aspects of the case and ascertaining the facts .and that even if creditors consept to the scheme, the court is not relieved of its ,responsibility to approve or reject a scheme based on the exercise of its discretion on a consideration of all aspects. attention in this connection was drawn to the decision in sevagarn ch6ttiar v. kasi air 1931 mad .344.5. thus, the main question that arises for consideration is whether the scheme for composition under s. 38 of the act submitted !by the insolvent deserved approval or ~rejection. there is no dispute that the first .respondent had obtained the two decrees against this insolvent in o.s. 864 and 1609 of 1973 district munsif court, karur, as could be seen f rom exs. b 1 and b 2. the insolvent also owed the first respondent other amounts under 'five promissory notes as well as under a mortgage decree. it is seen from the receipts parked as exs. a. i to a. 12, that varying amounts had been paid to the creditors, viz, respondents 2 to 13. tha- details of the amounts so stated to have been paid by the -insolvent to these creditors.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (1988)2MLJ349
.....in khivraj chordia v. g. maniklal bhattad reported in a.i.r. 1966 mad. 67 : i.l.r. (1966) mad. 451 : 78 l.w. 522. according to learned counsel, the facts of the present case will be covered by the following observation made by the learned judge ramamurti j., in that case. (page 72)keeping in mind the main object of the enactment, namely, prevention of unreasonable eviction of tenants, the principle that emerges from the several decisions is that for default to be regarded as wilful default, the conduct of the tenant should by such as to lend to the inference that his omission was a conscious violation of his obligation to pay the rent or reckless indifference. if the default was due to accident or inadvertence or erroneous or false sense of security based upon the conduct of the landlord himself the default cannot be said to be wilful default. it is not possible to lay down any hard and fast rule applicable to all cases. but the basic and essential distinction between mere default and wilful default should be borne in mind and the totality and cumulative effect of all the circumstances should be taken into account and not any particular feature of the case in isolation. in.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR1989Cal97
orderg.n. ray, j. 1. these two rules have been heard together as similar questions of law and fact are involved in both the matters and both the said rules are disposed of by this judgment.2. the short facts relating to the writ petitions concerning the two rules arc that the howrah wholesale fish traders' association is a registered association under the west bengal societies registration act, 1961 and the president, secretary, joint secretary, one of the executive members of the said association and the other members of the said association are the petitioners in the said two rules. it is the case of the petitioners that all the members of the said associations are fish traders. some of the members carry on such trade in fish as a proprietor and some carry on business in fish trading as partners of the partnership firm. the petitioners have contended that theyhad been carrying on such business of fish at nos. 10 and 11, i.c. bose road, nos. 15, 30 and 27, sreemanta kundu lane, 74 hari mohan bose road, 6 dobson road (now maulana abul kalam road) and 27, merry bibi lane within the municipal limits of the corporation of howrah. the respective place of business of the petitioners.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (1988)(17)LC535Tri(Delhi)
.....the period july 1976 to march 1977 and october 1977 to december 1977.2 the circumstances in which the question arose are that the appellants manufacture cement for which they hold a central excise licence. they were clearing what was called ordinary portland cement. (it is their submission that they do not manufacture rapid hardening cement at all and never did so). during the course of scrutiny of certain records pertaining to the appellants the central excise officers came across the test certificates given by the national test house, bombay in respect of some of the clearances of cement. the collector of central excise after due process held that the test reports of the national test house clearly indicated that cement manufactured by the appellants was not ordinary portland cement but rapid hardening cement. for this purpose the learned collector compared the fineness, setting time and compressive strength etc. as recorded in the test certificates. he held that from the data available it would be seen that the distinguishing characteristics of the two types of the cement are fineness and compressive strength. according to him, the test certificates of the national test.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT