Reported in : AIR1988Bom108; (1987)89BOMLR338; 1987MhLJ628
.....single judge of this court reported in pandurang appa patil v. ananda dhau ulpe (1977) tlr 29. we have examined the said decision and find that the facts in that case have no relevance to the issue which was involved before the learned judge and which is also involved in the present case. in that case, the question was whether the trial court was justified in refusing to make a reference of the issue of tenancy to the tenancy court. the trial court had refused to make the reference on the ground that the relief claimed in the suit was for injunction simpliciter. this court came to the conclusion that the relief was both for declaration that the plaintiff was in possession of the suit property in his capacity as a tenant and also for injunction. in this view of the matter, this court held that it was incumbent upon the trial court to refer the issue to the tenancy court, if the court came to the conclusion that prima facie the plaintiff had proved his possession. it was also held that the plaintiffs' alleged claim of tenancy was also relevant for the purpose of considering whether or not the plaintiffs were entitled to injunction as prayed for by them. it may also be mentioned.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 1988(14)LC696(Bombay)
.....by the respondents and permitting the appellants to ascertain the amount of excise duty to be refunded within three months.2. the respondents manufacture and sell electrodes. the electrodes are sold in the course of whole sale trade to dealers at the factory gate. excise duty was levied on the electrodes on 29th may, 1971. between june, 1971 and march, 1972 the respondents paid excise duty on the basis of a price list submitted by them and approved by the appellants. it was assessed on the maximum price list fixed by the respondents and the maximum price chargeable by the respondents' declares from their customers. the price charged by the dealers was loaded with, inter alia, the trade discount allowed to the dealers by the respondents. the respondents became aware, it was their case by reason of the judgment of the supreme court in a.k. roy v. voltas ltd., : 1973ecr60(sc) delivered on 1st december, 1972, that they had made a mistake of law in including the amount of the trade discount in the assessable value of the electrodes. accordingly, by letters dated 10th april 1973 and 12th june, 1973, the respondents filed a refund application in the sum of rs. 3,31,933.12 for the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR1988Kant248; ILR1988KAR1
.....was still alive and continued to enjoy the right of maintenance out of the joint family properties.' the aforesaid decision squarely applies to the facts of the present case. as it is already pointed out, the original propositus was one harubyle sanne gowda. he had four sons : obaiah, ujjinanna, venkappa gowda and ramanna gowda. the branches of obaiah and ujjinanna became extinct as they died unmarried. venkappa gowda expired when the family was joint leaving behind plaintiff no. 2 as his widow. even though the coparcener was reduced to a single unit i.e.' defendant no. i alone the character of the properties being joint family properties did not disappear as there was a widow of a deceased coparcener-in the family, namely, plaintiff no. 2, who had the legal right to bring a coparcener into the family by way of adoption. in addition to this it is also relevant to notice that the parties are from old mysore area, and the properties are situated in old mysore area. at the time when the husband of the second plaintiff died in or about the year 1940, the mysore hindu law women's rights act (act no. 10/33) was in force. according to cl (d) of sub-sec.(l) of s. 8 of that act a widow.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [1987]67STC241(MP)
.....board of revenue has referred the following common question of law for the opinion of this court, which arises in all these cases :whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the sales of materials like discarded machinery, chemicals, scrap, empty drums, unsuitable and unserviceable stores, etc., were liable to tax ?2. m.c.c. no. 104 of 1985 relates to the period 1st april, 1958 to 31st march, 1959 under the state act, whereas m. c. c. no. 105 of 1985 relates to the central act for the same period.3. m.c.c. no. 106 of 1985 relates to the period 1st january, 1961 to 31st december, 1961 under the state act, whereas m. c. c. no. 107 of 1985 relates to the central act for the same period.4. m.c.c. no. 108 of 1985 relates to the period 1st january, 1962 to 31st december, 1962 under the state act, whereas m. c. c. no. 109 of 1985 for the same period relates to the central act.5. similarly m.c.c. no. 110 of 1985 relates to the period 1st january, 1963 to 31st december, 1963 under the state act, whereas m. c. c. no. ill of 1986 relates to the same period under the central act.6. the facts giving rise to these references as per the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR1988Ori145
.....an alienation made after the attachment under a decree. provisions of section 64 are meant to safeguard the interest of the creditor. as against the attaching creditor a private sale would not be effective, but if the order of attachment is withdrawn or the claim of the creditor is otherwise satisfied, the sale deed executed would convey good title to the transferee.4. applying the aforesaid principle to the facts of the case it will appear that after attachment of the disputed land before judgment, the same was transferred in favour of the petitioner. therefore, the transfer is ineffective and void as against the interest of the petitioner. this being the position, the learned courts below were justified in rejecting the petition under order 21, rule 58 of the code which was not maintainable.5. for the reasons stated above, i find no merit in the civil revision which is dismissed. hearing fee is assessed at rs. 100/-.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [1988]68STC293(Orissa)
.....short 'the act'), the member, sales tax tribunal, orissa, has referred the following questions of law for opinion of this court:(i) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the member, sales tax tribunal, is legally right to hold that the dealer is liable to pay tax with effect from 5th april, 1975, that is, the date of its application for registration ?(ii) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the member, sales tax tribunal, is legally correct to hold that the order annulling the assessment for the period 30th june, 1975 by the assistant commissioner of sales tax is contrary to law ?2. the dealer had made a voluntary application for registration under section 9-a of the act on 5th april, 1975 and received the registration certificate on 11th july, 1975. in these circumstances, the sales tax officer held the petitioner liable to pay sales tax for the very first quarter of 1975-76, i.e., 1st april, 1975 to 30th june, 1975, and completed the assessment accordingly taking the g.t.o. at rs. 25,768.46. the dealer disputed the order of assessment on the ground that though it had made the application under section 9-a of the act, the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR1989Ker23
.....can be described as ordinary courts of civil judicature. they are governed by their prescribed rules of procedure and they deal with questions of fact and law raised before them by adopting a process which is described as judicial process. the powers which these courts exercise are judicial powers, the functions they discharge are judicial functions and the decisions they reach and pronounce are judicial decisions'.in khairunnissa v. municipal corporation., bombay, 1966 acj 37 (bom) it is said :'the tribunal is not a court, and its constitution is not governed by any legislation applicable to civil courts. the proceeding itself has to be commenced by an application in the prescribed form, and the resultant order is not even called a decree. section 110-c of the motor vehicles act provides for the procedure and it shows that the tribunal is entitled to follow such summary procedure as it may think fit, subject to the rules that may have been made. it also provides by section 110-b that the amount due under the award shall be recovered through the collector as arrears of revenue. section 110-b expressly bars the jurisdiction of civil courts in places where claims tribunals have.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR1988Ker115
.....with law expeditiously. it is the said judgment that is challenged by the appellants in this appeal.3. it is however necessary to notice one more fact, namely, that with a view to avoid further complications section 70 has since been amended by act 29 of 1986 by adding the following proviso to section 70(1) :'provided that a transfer under clause (b) or a reference under clause (c) shall not be made to a person equal or superior to him in rank.'in pursuance of the direction of the learned single judge, the assistant registrar of cooperative societies, nedumkandam, the 2nd appellant, has made a fresh award on 11-11-1986.4. section 70(1) of the act, which is relevant for the purpose of disposal of this case may be extracted :'70. decision and award on disputes : -- (1) the registrar may, on receipt of the reference of a dispute under section 69, -- (a) elect to decide the dispute himself; or(b) transfer it for disposal to any person who has been invested by the government with powers in that behalf; or(c) refer it for disposal to an arbitrator appointed by the registrar.' 5. the learned single judge has taken the view that the power of referring a dispute for disposal to an.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [1988]172ITR285(Ker)
.....new material came into the possession of the income-tax officer after the completion of the original assessments which necessitated the reopening of the assessments. in this view of the matter, the assessments were held to be legal and valid and covered by section 147(b) of the act. we are satisfied that the decision of the appellate tribunal is right. we are of the view that apart from the fact that the questions formulated for being referred to this court are pure questions of fact, there is no case for the petitioner even on the merits. further, the petitioner formulated one question under section 256(1) of the act praying to the appellate tribunal to refer the said question to this court. but what has been done now is to specify two questions in paragraph 11 of the original petitions for being referred to this court. this itself is not permissible.3. on the whole, there is no merit in these two original petitions. they are dismissed.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (1988)69CTR(Ker)78; [1988]170ITR80(Ker)
.....was justified in coming to the conclusion that the proceedings by notice dated september 2, 1977, were validly initiated ? 2. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal had material to come to the conclusion that the notice issued to the individual was only a mistake curable and not one which affects the jurisdiction although the assessment was made in the status of an 'association of persons' ?' 2. the respondent is the revenue. the matter relates to the assessment years 1974-75 to 1977-78. for these four years, no return of income was furnished in respect of 'archana hotel', kottayam. on september 2, 1977, the income-tax officer issued notices under section 148 of the income-tax act for the first three years and issed a notice under section 139(2) read with section 148 of the act for the assessment year 1977-78 to one sasikumar with address at hotel archana, t. b. road, kottayam. as to whether the notice was issued against the individual, sasikumar, or in any other capacity like the principal officer or the member of an association or body of individuals, was not specifically stated in the notice. under the circumstances, the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT