Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Judgments of 1981

226 judgments, newest first — showing 1–200.

COL. AVTAR SINGH SEKHONversusUNION OF INDIA

1980 INSC 14331 July 1980Dismissed

The petitioners, two army colonels, contested the appointment to the sole brigadier post heading Military Farms. The High Court directed the Defence Department to select the best officer, finding both equal in merit but recommending the senior colonel (the respondent) for promotion. The Supreme Court later allowed the

BALKISHAN A. DEVIDAYAL ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC.

1980 INSC 14431 July 1980Dismissed

The appellant was charged under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 for allegedly possessing railway property obtained through forged receipts. An RPF inspector recorded his statements during an inquiry, but the trial magistrate denied the appellant access to copies of documents and statements, leading

MINERVA MILLS LTD. & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 14231 July 1980Disposed off

Minerva Mills Ltd., a textile company, was nationalized under the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1974, following an investigation and takeover order under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the National

C. C. PADMANABHAN & OTHERSversusTHE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS

1980 INSC 14030 July 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were Assistant Educational Officers (AEO) in the Kerala Education Service, were ordered by a 1977 government letter to be transferred back to the lower post of High School Assistant (HSA) after six years of service. They challenged the reversion as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution

K.K. KRISHNANversusM. K. VIJAYA RAGHAVAN

1980 INSC 14130 July 1980Dismissed

The landlord sought eviction of the tenant under Section 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, alleging the tenant had sublet the premises without consent. The Rent Controller and successive courts upheld the eviction. The tenant argued that Section 108(j) of the Transfer of Property Act,

STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS ETC.versusRAMAN LAL KESHAV LAL & ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 13930 July 1980Disposed off

The petitioners, former municipal employees now serving in gram or nagar panchayats, sought orders directing the Gujarat government to equate their posts with those in the Panchayat Service, fix seniority, pay scales and extend pay‑commission benefits, arguing that the Panchayat Service is a civil service of the State.

SANT SINGH NALWA & ANR.versusTHE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA & ORS., ETC.

1981 INSC 7930 March 1981Dismissed

The appellants, displaced persons, were allotted sailab land which later fell under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. Revenue authorities, applying the Act, allowed each appellant only 50 standard acres and declared the balance surplus. The appellants contended that the classification of land in Annexure ‘

KIRIT KUMAR CHAMAN LAL KUNDALIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

1981 INSC 2130 January 1981Case Allowed

Kirit Kumar was detained under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act. He challenged the detention in the Gujarat High Court, arguing that documents referred to in the grounds of detention were not supplied, preventing an effective representation. The High Court dis

RAINBOW STEELS LTD. AND ANR.versusCOMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

1981 INSC 2230 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Government, under Section 3A of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948, notified that turnover from "old, discarded, unserviceable or obsolete machinery" would attract a 5% sales tax. A thermal power plant, in perfect working condition, was sold by the State Electricity Board to appellant 1, who used i

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusKAPUR CHAND KESARIMAL JAIN

1981 INSC 2030 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was convicted under Section 135 of the Customs Act and the Defence of India Rules for smuggling 2015 tolas of contraband gold, receiving rigorous imprisonment and fines. On remand, the Bombay High Court granted him the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, citing confiscation of the gol

ANSARI & ORS.versusSTATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LUCKNOW & ORS.

1980 INSC 20329 October 1980Case Allowed

The appellants, Praveen Ansari and others, applied for temporary permits to ply passenger vehicles on an inter‑regional route under section 68‑F(1‑C) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The State Transport Authority granted three temporary permits to the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, which had applied fo

DARA SINGHversusSTATE THROUGH DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT, NEW

1980 INSC 20429 October 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The Director of Enforcement, under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, issued an ex parte order on May 12, 1967 imposing a Rs.6,000 penalty on Dara Singh for contraventions of sections 4 and 9, with a 45‑day payment deadline. No payment was made and a complaint under section 23F was filed alleging that a copy of

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH HYDERABADversusTOSHOKU LTD. GUNTUR ETC.

1980 INSC 16929 August 1980Dismissed

The statutory agent in Guntur exported tobacco to Japan and France and paid a 3% commission to non‑resident agents (Toshoku Ltd. and a French firm). The sale proceeds were received in India, and the agent made credit entries for the commissions in his books before remitting the amounts abroad. The Revenue assessed the

MADAN LALversusMST. GOPI & ANR.

1980 INSC 16829 August 1980Dismissed

The dispute concerned a deed of adoption executed by Mansaram in 1944, which the appellant Madan Lal sought to enforce. The trial and district courts dismissed the suit, but the Rajasthan High Court set aside those judgments, holding that Mansaram was not of sound mind when he executed the deed. The Supreme Court exami

SHRISHAILAGOUDA AND OTHERS ETC.versusGURUSANGAPPA RAMASOMAPPA DESAI AND ANOTHER

1980 INSC 13629 July 1980Dismissed

The appellants claimed ownership of certain paragana watan lands that had been resumed under the Bombay Pargana and Kulkarni Watans (Abolition) Act, 1950. The respondent, a descendant of the original watandar, applied for regrant of the lands under section 4 of the 1950 Act, while the appellants contested his entitleme

M. N. DODAMANI & ORS.versusU.S. D. WALIKAR (DEAD) BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES & ORS.

1980 INSC 13729 July 1980Dismissed

The appellants claimed that a 1927 transfer of two plots of land, recorded as a sale, was in fact a mortgage, and sought debt adjustment under section 4 of the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1947. The trial court held the transfer was a mortgage but dismissed the claim, invoking protection for the respondents

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, RATLAMversusSHRI VARDHICHAND & ORS.

1980 INSC 13829 July 1980Dismissed

Residents of Ratlam filed a complaint under s.133 of the Criminal Procedure Code alleging that the Municipal Council had failed to provide sanitary facilities, construct drainage, and stop industrial discharge, creating a public nuisance. The Sub‑Divisional Magistrate ordered the municipality to construct drains, provi

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.versusRAJA RAM & ORS.

1981 INSC 1929 January 1981Dismissed

The State of Punjab sought to acquire nine biswas of land in Morinda for the Food Corporation of India (FCI) to build grain godowns. The respondents challenged the acquisition, arguing that the FCI was not a "company" within section 3(e) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and therefore Chapter VII provisions applicable

S. L. SACHDEV & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 20228 October 1980Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, Upper Division Clerks (UDCs) transferred from the Posts & Telegraphs Audit Offices to the Savings Bank Control‑Internal Check Organisation (SBCO‑ICO), challenged the Director‑General’s circulars that limited promotion of UDCs from the Audit Offices to 10 % of Selection‑Grade posts and 20 % of Head‑Cler

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusP. T. APPAIAH AND ANOTHER

1980 INSC 16728 August 1980Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed the acquittal of P.T. Appaiah and another, who had been convicted by a Sessions Judge for murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34. A Division Bench of the High Court upheld the conviction but was split on whether the offence was murder or culpable homicide. Under s.429 of the Code of

RAJPATIversusBACHAN & ANR.

1980 INSC 13528 July 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged the Allahabad High Court's order quashing a magistrate's final decree under CrPC s.145, which granted him possession of disputed land. The magistrate had recorded a finding of breach of peace in the preliminary order but omitted such a finding in the final order. The High Court, invoking s.482,

HASMAT RAJ & ANR.versusRAGHUNATH PRASAD

1981 INSC 10428 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed two eviction suits seeking possession of a non‑residential building, claiming he needed the premises to start a medicine shop and to carry out reconstruction, and that he had no other suitable accommodation. The tenant argued that the landlord already possessed a major portion of the building (vacate

U.P. CO-OPERATIVE CANE UNION FEDERATION LTD. & ANOTHERversusLILADHAR & OTHERS

1980 INSC 16627 August 1980Dismissed

The respondent, a supervisor in a co‑operative sugarcane development society, was dismissed after disciplinary proceedings and sued the society in a civil court for reinstatement and back wages. The society argued that the suit was barred because, under Rule 115 of the U.P. Co‑operative Societies Rules, 1936, any dispu

NEW INDIA SUGAR WORKS ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

1981 INSC 4927 February 1981Dismissed

The petitioners, New India Sugar Works, challenged a Uttar Pradesh government order imposing a levy on khandsari sugar, arguing that the levy should not apply to sugar produced before the order and that the fixed levy price did not cover manufacturing costs, violating their constitutional rights. The Supreme Court held

ARTI SAPRUversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & OTHERS

1981 INSC 5027 February 1981Case Allowed

The petitioners, who were denied admission to the MBBS courses of the Government Medical Colleges in Srinagar and Jammu for 1980‑81, challenged the State's reservation policy that earmarked 17% of seats for "rectification of regional imbalances" by classifying certain villages as socially and educationally backward. Th

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusHEMAREDDY ALIAS VEMAREDDY AND ANR.

1981 INSC 1827 January 1981Dismissed

The State of Karnataka appealed against the Karnataka High Court’s order acquitting Hemareddy alias Vemareddy of offences under Sections 467 read with 114 of the IPC and 193 IPC, and modifying the sentence of Pyatal Bhimakka. The case arose from a dispute over land mortgaged for twenty years, where a forged sale deed d

BRIJ BIHARI LAL AGARWALversusHIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

1980 INSC 22826 November 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Brij Bihari Lal Agarwal, a District and Sessions Judge of Madhya Pradesh, was compulsorily retired under Fundamental Rule 56(3) of the Madhya Pradesh Shiksha Sevak (Adhivashikya Ayu) Sanshodhan Adhiniyam, 1976. He challenged the order, arguing that the High Court's recommendation was based on confidential reports that

RANJIT SINGH ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA

1980 INSC 19326 September 1980Case Allowed

The petitioners, licensed manufacturers of firearms, challenged the Union of India's reduction of their monthly production quotas after the Arms Act, 1959 came into force. They argued that the curtailment caused hardship, was arbitrary, and that they were denied a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) to carry on th

MANGALBHAI MOTIRAM PATELversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1980 INSC 19226 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, Mangalbhai Motiram Patel, were detained under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 on the ground of alleged involvement in smuggling. The petitioner applied for copies of all documents, statements and writings relied upon in the detention

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusRAMACHANDRA SAMBHAJI KANDEKAR ETC.

1980 INSC 16226 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, each owning no more than four powerlooms acquired from licensed manufacturers, claimed exemption from excise duty on cotton fabrics under Item 7 of the 1957 exemption notification. The Central Government had introduced a series of provisos, the third of which (effective 1 April 1961) stipulated that an

L.B. SUGAR FACTORY & OIL MILLS (P) LTD. PILIBHITversusC.L.T. U.P., LUCKNOW

1980 INSC 16326 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

L.B. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills Ltd., a sugar manufacturer, contributed Rs 22,332 to the construction of a dam and road at the request of the Collector and Rs 50,000 towards roads under a Sugarcane Development Scheme. Both amounts were claimed as deductions under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income‑Tax Act, 1922, but

THE TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF BOMBAYversusTHE PREMIER AUTOMOBILES LTD.

1980 INSC 16526 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Premier Automobiles imported a heavy grinding machine that was taken into the custody of the Bombay Port Trust Board upon landing. While the Board's employees were moving the case on a trolley, it fell and the machinery was severely damaged. Premier sued the Board for damages, alleging negligence, misfeasance and non‑f

THE COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P.versusBISHAMBER SINGH LAYAQ RAM

1980 INSC 16426 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The Commissioner of Sales Tax appealed against a judgment of the Allahabad High Court which had held that the assessee, Bishamber Singh Layaq Ram, was not a dealer under section 2(c) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 and therefore not liable to purchase tax. The assessee, registered as a dealer, operated as a kutcha arha

UNITED COMMERCIAL BANKversusBANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1981 INSC 7826 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a dispute over a letter of credit issued by United Commercial Bank (UCB) for the sale of mustard oil by Godrej Soaps Ltd. to the Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation. The seller presented documents that the bank deemed discrepant because the railway receipts described the oil as "unrefined" c

CHOWGULE & CO. PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS (AND VICE VERSA)

1980 INSC 22625 November 1980Disposed off

Chowgule & Co. Pvt. Ltd., a mining company, sought inclusion of 36 items of goods in its Certificate of Registration under Section 8(3)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, claiming they were used in mining and processing of ore for export. The Sales Tax Officer allowed only 11 items, and subsequent revisions and the Judic

BRIJENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1980 INSC 22725 November 1980Case Allowed

Brijendra Singh, an army officer, owned 44 acres of land in Uttar Pradesh and sold two parcels of 12.5 acres each in 1971 to raise funds for building a house in New Delhi. The Prescribed Authority declared the 25.96 acres surplus under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling of Land Holding Act, 1960 (as amended). The

BASANT LAL (DEAD) BY LRS. & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

1980 INSC 19025 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land leased to Narain Das Lachman Das Oil Mill (later Northern India Oil Industries Ltd), gave a notice on 26 February 1944 terminating the lease and allowing the lessee until 30 June 1944 to remove machinery, stores, and buildings as per clause 6 of the lease dated 2 June 1941. The lessee obt

STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.versusM/S. HANSA CORPORATION

1980 INSC 19125 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka Legislature enacted the Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1979 to replace octroi by levying a tax of up to 2% ad valorem on specified goods (textiles, tobacco, sugar) entering 27 selected local areas. The State notified the areas and rates, and several petitions challenged the Act on the grounds

INDO INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIESversusCOMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, UTTAR PRADESH.

1981 INSC 7725 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Indo International Industries manufactured hypodermic clinical syringes and, for the assessment year 1973‑74, claimed that the turnover up to 30 Nov 1973 should be taxed at 4 % as "hospital equipment" under Entry 44 (or at 3½ % as an unclassified item) and the turnover from 1 Dec 1973 to 31 Mar 1974 at 7 % as an unclas

RAM CHANDERversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1981 INSC 4725 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Chander was convicted of murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court upheld his conviction while acquitting a co‑accused. The appellant argued that the Sessions Judge had violated the principle of a fair trial by rebuking and threatening key eyewitnesses

SMT. SHALINI SONI ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 20124 October 1980Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined three writ petitions challenging detentions under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The petitioners argued that a communication dated July 27, 1980, sent by their counsel requesting the detainee’s release and copies of documents, was a "rep

SRINIVASA ENTERPRISES & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC.

1980 INSC 18924 September 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, which imposes a total ban on prize chit schemes. Petitioners argued that the ban violated the fundamental right to trade under Art.19(1)(g), was discriminatory under Art.14, and exceeded Parliament's l

SADA KAURversusBAKHTAWAR SINGH AND ORS.

1980 INSC 13424 July 1980Dismissed

Sada Kaur, a widow of a Dhaliwal Jat from Tehsil Muktsar, remarried her deceased husband's younger brother in the Karewa form. The brothers of the deceased sued for a declaration that her remarriage caused forfeiture of her life interest in her first husband's estate, seeking a two‑thirds share. The central issue was w

LAJPAT RAJ AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

1981 INSC 10324 April 1981Dismissed

The case concerned a displaced person (Respondent No.3) who, after being allotted more than 60 acres, gifted part of his land to his wife, who subsequently sold it to the appellants. The Special Collector, relying on a rule that post‑Act sales should be included in the landowner's "select area," declared the land as pa

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusB. RAGHURAMA SHETTY ETC.

1981 INSC 7424 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The assessees, owners of rice mills, bought paddy from agriculturists (who were exempt from sales tax) and milled it into rice for sale. The Karnataka Sales Tax Authority levied purchase tax on the paddy under section 6(i) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The assessees contended that paddy and rice are the same co

DAGADUversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1981 INSC 7524 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Dagadu was convicted of murder under IPC s.302 and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Bombay High Court dismissed his first appeal summarily, using only the word "rejected" and providing no reasons. The Supreme Court examined the High Court's power under CrPC s.384 (formerly s.421) to dismiss appeals sum

BHUDEO MANDAL & OTHERSversusSTATE OF BIHAR

1981 INSC 7624 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were involved in an irrigation dispute during which the deceased, Mainu Manda, prevented them from irrigating their land. Bhudeo Mandal, one of the appellants, struck the deceased, causing his death, while the other appellants were armed with lathis but caused no injuries. The Sessions Court convicted Bh

STATE OF HARYANAversusSHER SINGH & ORS.

1981 INSC 4624 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana charged Sher Singh and his two sons with the murder of Sher Singh's half‑brothers, alleging they assaulted and burned the victims in a village courtyard. The trial court convicted them under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, sentencing Sher Singh to death and the others to life imprisonment; the High

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALAversusSMT. P.K. KOCHAMMU AMMA PEROKE

1980 INSC 18823 September 1980Dismissed

The appellant, a female partner in two firms, omitted from her 1964-65 return the shares of profit attributable to her husband and minor daughter, which under s.64(1)(i) and (iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 must be included in her total income. The Revenue assessed the omitted amount and imposed a penalty under s.271(

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

THAMMANNAversusK. VEERA REDDY & ORS.

1980 INSC 13323 July 1980Dismissed

In the 1978 Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, K. Veera Reddy was elected. V. Krishna Reddy filed an election petition alleging Veera Reddy's disqualification under Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. All candidates, including Thammanna (original respondent No.5), were joined as respond

GANGA SARAN SONS PVT. LTD. CALCUTTAversusINCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS.

1981 INSC 10123 April 1981Case Allowed

The assessee, Ganga Saran and Sons Pvt. Ltd., incorporated in 1947, paid salary, commission and bonus to its managing director Deo Datt Sharma, who was also its brother‑in‑law and managed the Delhi branch. The Income Tax Officer, after several assessments where the remuneration was allowed as a deduction, issued a noti

ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY & ORS.versusPRAYAG DASS AGARWAL

1981 INSC 10223 April 1981Disposed off

The respondent, son of a deceased estate, was assessed estate duty of Rs 3,37,543.40. While his appeal against the assessment was pending, he applied under section 52(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, offering a property valued at Rs 2,53,655 as part payment. The Central Board of Direct Taxes rejected the offer and prop

K. JANARDHAN PILLAI & ANR. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1981 INSC 1723 January 1981Case Allowed

The Kerala State Government declared raw cashew nut an essential article under the Kerala Essential Articles Control (Temporary Powers) Act, 1961 and issued a procurement and distribution order. Petitioners processing cashew nuts challenged the declaration under Article 32, arguing that raw cashew nut is a "foodstuff"

AMETEEP MACHINE TOOLSversusLABOUR COURT HARYANA & ANOTHER

1980 INSC 18522 September 1980Dismissed

Ametep Machine Tools, a manufacturer employing 250 workers, entered into a settlement under Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act on June 20, 1969, which barred further financial demands for two years. In August 1970 a fresh demand for dearness allowance led to a sit‑down strike, and the management alleged that wor

JAIN INK MANUFACTURING COMPANYversusLIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.

1980 INSC 16022 August 1980Dismissed

The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) bought a building at auction and the appellant, Jain Ink Manufacturing Co., was a tenant under the previous owner. LIC served notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act to terminate the tenancy, but the appellant remained in possession. LIC then invoked the Pu

GIAN SINGH MANNversusTHE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AND ANR.

1980 INSC 16122 August 1980Dismissed

Gian Singh Mann, a judicial officer of the Punjab Civil Service (Judicial Branch), challenged the High Court's order withdrawing his judicial work and his subsequent premature retirement, seeking reinstatement and promotion to the Selection Grade and the Punjab Superior Judicial Service under a reservation claim. He fi

SHYAM SUNDER PRASAD SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS .

1980 INSC 13022 July 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a long‑standing dispute over the Bettiah Raj estate, focusing on whether Raja Jugal Kishore Singh could be treated as a "putrika‑putra" (a daughter’s son appointed as a son) of Raja Dhrub Singh and thus inherit the estate. The Court analyzed ancient Hindu texts, commentaries, and modern treat

R.K. GARG, ADVOCATEversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

1981 INSC 9822 April 1981Case Partly allowed

Advocate R.K. Garg, appearing for a petitioner in a Rent Act matter, threw his shoe at the presiding judge after the petition was dismissed for non‑payment of process fee under Order 9 Rule 2 CPC. The judge sought to arrest him under Section 228 IPC and referred the matter to the Himachal Pradesh High Court under Secti

C.I.T. BOMBAYversusBAR COUNCIL OF MAHARASHTRA BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA BAR COUNCIL OF GUJARAT

1981 INSC 9922 April 1981Dismissed

The Bar Council of Maharashtra, a body corporate under the Advocates Act, 1961, derived income from interest on securities and enrolment fees for the assessment years 1962-63 to 1964-65. The Revenue assessed this income, but the Council claimed exemption under section 10(23A) for enrolment fees and under section 11 for

BIBI RAHMANI KHATOON & ORS.versusHARKOO GOPE & ORS.

1981 INSC 10022 April 1981Case Partly allowed

Bibi Rahmani Khatoon and others sued Harkoo Gope and others for declaration of title and possession of two agricultural land parcels (khata Nos. 458 and 459). The trial court and the first appellate court declared the plaintiffs owners of both parcels. While a second appeal was pending, the State Government issued a no

MANGAT RAI & ANR.versusKIDAR NATH & ORS.

1980 INSC 15721 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Mangat Rai and another, tenants, deposited all arrears of rent, future rent, interest and costs in the court of a Senior Sub‑Judge under Section 31 of the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934. The landlord sued for eviction under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, claiming the deposit wa

GURCHARAN SINGH & ORS .versusV. K. KAUSHAL

1980 INSC 15921 August 1980Dismissed

The landlord sought eviction of a shop in Ambala Cantonment on the ground that the tenant, Gurcharan Singh, had sub-let the premises without his written consent, invoking Section 13(2)(ii)(a) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. The Rent Controller and appellate authority held that sub‑letting had occur

LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ANR.versusDURGA PADA MUKHERJEE & OTHERS

1980 INSC 15821 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The State Government of West Bengal issued three notifications under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to acquire land belonging to the respondents for what it claimed was a public purpose—first for the expansion of a private company's factory and later for industrial development. The respondents objected, alleging that

KULJEET SINGH @ RANGAversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1981 INSC 9621 April 1981Dismissed

Kuljeet Singh alias Ranga was convicted along with a co‑accused for the murder of two children and sentenced to death under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, with additional convictions under sections 363, 365, 366 and 376. The conviction and sentence were affirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court di

MOHAN LALversusMANAGEMENT OF M/S BHARAT ELECTRONICS LTD.

1981 INSC 9721 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Mohan Lal was employed as a salesman by Bharat Electronics Ltd. from 8 December 1973 and his services were terminated on 19 October 1974. The Labour Court held that the termination was a lawful dismissal on probation and not retrenchment. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the termination fell within the def

AMRUTLAL CHUNILAL RAVALversusDATTATRAYA PANDURANG HAJARNIS & ORS.

1980 INSC 22520 November 1980Dismissed

Amrutlal Chunilal Raval was elected President of the Bhor Municipal Council in 1974, but a prior conviction on 26 December 1973 under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act rendered him disqualified under Section 16(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965, which imposes a five‑year bar unless the State Gover

SRI SRI KALIMATA THAKURANI & SRI SRI RAGHUNATH JEW & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1981 INSC 4420 February 1981Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 and its amendments of 1972 and 1977, alleging violations of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution and claiming the provisions were arbitrary, discriminatory and unreasonable. The Court examined whether the Acts, placed in the Ninth Schedule before 24 Ap

HARCHARAN SINGHversusSHIV RANI AND ORS.

1981 INSC 4320 February 1981Dismissed

Harcharan Singh, a tenant of a shop in a U.P. cantonment, failed to pay rent for 1965‑66. The landlord sent a combined notice of arrears and eviction by registered post on 9 November 1966, which the tenant refused to accept on 10 November. The landlord sued for eviction under the U.P. Cantonment (Control of Rent & Evic

STATE OF PUNJABversusCHARAN SINGH

1981 INSC 4520 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Charan Singh, a police officer, was convicted under sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Punjab High Court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution was invalid because the police department had not complied with Rule 16.38 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. On appeal, the Supreme Court e

KHATRI AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1980 INSC 24119 December 1980Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined the plight of blind prisoners in Bihar who alleged police‑inflicted blinding and the State's failure to provide free legal aid. It reaffirmed that the right to free legal services for an indigent accused is an essential component of the fair procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and that the Sta

BALESHWAR DASS & ORS. ETCversusSTATE OF U. P. & ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 15519 August 1980Case Partly allowed

The case concerned three categories of Assistant Engineers in the Uttar Pradesh Service of Engineers (Irrigation Branch) – direct recruits, promoted subordinate engineers and temporary engineers – and their claim to seniority. The petitioners argued that temporary engineers, having fulfilled qualifications, passed prob

STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.versusM. N. SUNDARAJAN

1980 INSC 15619 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

M.N. Sundarajan, a Section Officer in the Tamil Nadu Secretariat, was compulsorily retired on 2 March 1976 under Fundamental Rule 56(d). He challenged the retirement in the Madras High Court, arguing that the Review Committee which considered his case was improperly constituted, as the Government Order of 19 March 1973

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE ETC. ETC.versusB. C. SRINIVASA SETTY, ETC. ETC.

1981 INSC 4119 February 1981Dismissed

The assessee, a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing agarbattis, was dissolved in 1965 and its goodwill was valued at Rs.1,50,000. The goodwill was transferred to a newly formed partnership of the same name. The Income‑Tax Officer did not tax any gain on this transfer, but the Commissioner invoked revisional juris

EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS LTD.versusTHE STATE OF MADRAS

1981 INSC 4219 February 1981Dismissed

Express Newspapers Ltd. appealed to the Supreme Court against a judgment of the Madras High Court. The High Court had issued a certificate under Article 133(1)(a) and (c) of the Constitution, but the certificate failed to specify the substantial question of law and gave no reasons for its issuance. The Supreme Court, r

STATE OF BIHARversusUMA SHANKAR KETRIWAL & OTHERS

1980 INSC 23918 December 1980Dismissed

The State of Bihar charged seven respondents under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for alleged misappropriation of G.C. sheets. The case, initiated in 1963, suffered extreme delays with the charge framed only in 1967 and the trial dragging on for over 20 years. The Patna High Court quashed the proceedings in

HARISH CHANDER & ORS.versusGHISA RAM AND ANR.

1980 INSC 24018 December 1980Dismissed

The plaintiff, a respondent in a suit for pre-emption, claimed he was a tenant of the disputed land at the time it was sold to the appellants in 1967. The appellants contended they had been tenants since 1965 under a lease from the vendor. The revenue records (Jamabandi for 1959‑60 and subsequent Khasra‑Girdawaris) lis

S. L. KAPOORversusJAGMOHAN & ORS.

1980 INSC 18418 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The Lt. Governor of Delhi superseded the New Delhi Municipal Committee under Section 238(1) of the Punjab Municipal Act, alleging incompetence, default and abuse of power. Two non‑official members of the Committee challenged the order, contending that they were not given any opportunity to be heard on the allegations.

BALDEV RAJ CHADHAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 15318 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Baldev Raj, an Accounts Officer appointed by the Comptroller and Auditor General, was compulsorily retired on 27 August 1975 under F.R. 56(j)(i) by the Accountant General in the name of public interest. He challenged the retirement, arguing that the Accountant General was not the "appropriate authority" and that the de

CHAMPAK LAL H. THAKKAR AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

1980 INSC 15418 August 1980Dismissed

The appellants, directors of Morvi Vegetable Products Ltd., were convicted under Section 22A of the Minimum Wages Act for failing to maintain wage registers and related documents. They contended that their plant, which manufactured vanaspati (hydrogenated vegetable oil), was not an "oil mill" and therefore fell outside

MUNIAPPANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

1981 INSC 7218 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Muniappan was convicted of murdering his maternal uncle and the uncle's son, a double homicide, and was sentenced to death by the Sessions Judge, who described the crime as a "terrific double murder." The Madras High Court affirmed both the conviction and the death sentence. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whethe

HARISH PAHWAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

1981 INSC 7318 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Harish Pahwa was detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 on 16 May 1980. He filed a representation against his detention on 3 June 1980, which the Uttar Pradesh State Government received on 4 June but failed to decide promptly, finally rejecting it on 24 June

MAN MOHAN TULIversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS.

1981 INSC 3818 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Man Mohan Tuli owned godowns on the Grand Trunk Road where goods destined for places beyond Delhi were unloaded, sorted and reloaded before passing through Delhi. The Delhi Municipal Corporation had issued orders to collect terminal tax on these goods at the entry to Tuli's land. The High Court upheld the levy, holding

MST. ZOHARA KHATOONversusMOHD. IBRAHIM

1981 INSC 3918 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Zohra Khatoon, the legally married wife of Mohd. Ibrahim, filed a petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for maintenance for herself and her minor child after the husband neglected her. The trial magistrate granted Rs.100 per month to both, but the High Court quashed the maintenance for the wif

CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.versusV. J. CORNELIUS ETC.

1981 INSC 4018 February 1981Dismissed

The Andhra Pradesh Government issued the Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1969 and later an executive order fixing the pay of employees placed in the Selection Grade so that it would not exceed the pay of their seniors in higher posts. The High Court struck down this order as violative of Articles 14, 16 and Fundamental Ru

SHANKARLAL GYARASILAL DIXITversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1980 INSC 23717 December 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Shankarlal Gyarasilal Dixit, was convicted of rape and murder of a five‑year‑old girl based solely on circumstantial evidence, including the discovery of the child's body in his house, alleged presence of the appellant at the scene, and forensic traces such as a semen stain on his under‑pant. The Supreme

A. T. ZAMBRE AND OTHERSversusKARTAR KRISHNA SHASHTRI

1980 INSC 23817 December 1980Dismissed

The appellant challenged the High Court's order that declared sub‑section (5) of section 17 of the Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act, 1961 unconstitutional. The provision allowed persons who were practising Ayurvedic or Unani medicine in the Bombay area on 4 November 1941, but not listed under the Bombay Medical Pr

KU. SONIA BHATIAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1981 INSC 6917 March 1981Dismissed

The appellant, Sonia Bhatia, claimed ownership of 80 bighas of land gifted to her by her grandfather on 28 January 1972, after the statutory cut‑off date of 24 January 1971 under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The Prescribed Authority ignored the gift under Section 5(6), treating it

SURESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 7017 March 1981Case Partly allowed

Suresh, a domestic servant, was convicted of murdering his employer Geeta and her three‑year‑old son Anil and of attempting to murder the five‑year‑old Sunil. The conviction rested on the testimony of Sunil, a five‑year‑old child who was not sworn, and on corroborative evidence linking Suresh to the crime. The trial co

GAYASIversusSTATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 7117 March 1981

The deceased Bhagwan Singh, an Amin, was performing his official duty of auctioning the appellant's land when the appellant Gayasi, along with Moo! Chand and Daya Ram, lay in wait. Daya Ram shot Bhagwan Singh, causing him to fall, and Gayasi then decapitated him with a sword. Gayasi was convicted under IPC sections 302

STATE OF ASSAMversusJITENDRA KUMAR SENAPATI & OTHERS

1981 INSC 3717 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Assam acquired 7.60 acres of land at Lawsohtun, Shillong under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The owners negotiated a reduced compensation of Rs 4,41,202.45, signing an agreement on 24 February 1969 that they would accept this amount and make no further claim for compensation if payment was made by 31 Mar

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusR. C. JAIN & ORS.

1981 INSC 3517 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) had paid bonus to its employees for ten years until 1973‑74, after which it stopped the payments on advice of the Ministry of Law. The employees challenged the stoppage by filing a writ petition, which the Delhi High Court allowed. The Union of India and the DDA appealed to the Sup

RAMESHCHANDRA KACHARDAS PORWAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ETC.

1981 INSC 3617 February 1981Dismissed

The petitioners, wholesale traders in onions, potatoes and other produce, challenged notifications under the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963 that required them to shift their business to newly declared principal market yards and to conduct all marketing of declared agricultural produce

KISHINCHAND CHELLARAMversusTHE COMMR. OF INCOME-TAX BOMBAY CITY II, BOMBAY

1980 INSC 18216 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The firm M/s Kishinchand Chellaram was reassessed for the year 1947-48 after the Income Tax Officer received information that Rs 1,07,350 had been telegraphed from its Madras office to Bombay in favour of a person named Nathirmal. The Officer repeatedly asked the assessee to explain the transaction but failed to disclo

MAHADEO PRASAD SINGH & ANR.versusRAM LOCHAN & ORS.

1980 INSC 18316 September 1980Dismissed

The appellant obtained a money decree from the Small Causes Court in 1953 and, under Section 39(1)(d) CPC, had it transferred to the Munsif Court for execution. The Munsif Court sold the immovable property in execution of the decree, and the purchaser later sold it to the respondents. The respondents challenged the sal

RAFIQ & ANR.versusMUNSHILAL & ANR.

1981 INSC 9516 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Rafiq appealed to the Allahabad High Court, but his appointed advocate failed to appear, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal. Rafiq filed an application seeking recall of the dismissal and permission to participate, which the High Court rejected due to the advocate's delay in filing an affidavit. The Supreme Court

OM PRAKASH SUD ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF J & K & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1981 INSC 3416 February 1981Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, small‑scale resin manufacturers, applied to the Jammu & Kashmir government for allotment of resin under the State's industrial policy but were denied, while other applicants (respondents 4‑16) received quotas despite many not being formally registered. The petitioners claimed this differential treatmen

LALLUBHAI JOGIBHAI PATELversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 23515 December 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Lallubhai Jogibhai Patel was detained under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 on 30 January 1980. He filed a writ petition (No. 449 of 1980) under Article 32 challenging the detention, which was dismissed. After the dismissal he raised additional grounds

ANAND SWARUP MARESH KUMARversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX

1980 INSC 18115 September 1980Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a dealer in agricultural produce, challenged the inclusion of market fees and commission (dami) in the turnover of purchases for sales‑tax assessment under Section 3‑D of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, and also contested the levy of additional tax under Section 3‑F on that turnover. The Court held that Se

GOKARAJU RANGARAJU ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1981 INSC 9215 April 1981Dismissed

The appellants were convicted by two District Judges whose appointments were later declared invalid for violating Article 233 of the Constitution. The appellants argued that the judgments rendered by those judges were void and that the Constitution (20th Amendment) rendered them a surplusage. The Supreme Court held tha

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSMT. KALKI & ANR.

1981 INSC 9415 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court reviewed the acquittal of Kalki and Amara by the Rajasthan High Court, which had set aside their convictions on the ground that the sole eye‑witness, the deceased’s wife, was a "highly interested" witness and that her testimony contained material discrepancies. The Court held that being related to the

STATE OF PUNJABversusWASSON SINGH AND FIVE OTHERS

1981 INSC 1515 January 1981Case Partly allowed

The State of Punjab charged six accused of murdering Hazara Singh and Resham Singh, relying primarily on the eye‑witness testimony of Resham Singh (PW‑2) and Bachan Singh (PW‑3). The High Court acquitted all accused, rejecting the witnesses as interested and pointing to inconsistencies, lack of motive for most accused,

VIDYA CHARAN SHUKLAversusPURSHOTTAM LAL KAUSHIK

1981 INSC 1415 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Vidya Charan Shukla was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment exceeding two years, but his conviction was stayed pending appeal. He filed his nomination for the Lok Sabha election, which was accepted despite an objection that he was disqualified under Section 8(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. He was

SUPERINTENDENT & REMEMBRANCER OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, WEST BENGALversusSATYEN BHOWMICK AND ORS.

1981 INSC 1615 January 1981Disposed off

The State charged Satyen Bhowmick and others under the Official Secrets Act for passing military secrets. During a commitment inquiry the prosecution invoked Section 14 of the Act to hold the trial in camera and to bar the accused from obtaining copies of witness statements. The magistrate allowed the defence counsel t

AKHIL BHARATIYA SOSHIT KARAMCHARI SANGH (RAILWAY) REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL SECRETARY ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 22414 November 1980Dismissed

The Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh and other petitioners challenged a series of Railway Board circulars that provided reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in recruitment and promotion, introduced a "carry forward" rule for unfilled reserved vacancies, allowed lower qualification standards, and

RAFIQversusSTATE OF U.P.

1980 INSC 15214 August 1980Dismissed

Rafiq was convicted by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court for raping a middle‑aged Bal Sewika who was sleeping in a girls' school, and was sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. He filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, contending that the absence of physical injuries on the vict

NEW SATGRAM ENGINEERING WORKS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. AND VICE VERSA

1980 INSC 15114 August 1980Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, New Satgram Engineering Works and related properties, challenged the takeover of their engineering unit, bungalow and guest house by the Central Government under the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973, seeking a mandamus. The High Court declined to decide whether these assets fell within the defini

RAJASTHAN PHARMACEUTICAL LABORATORY, BANGALORE AND TWO OTHERSversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

1981 INSC 1314 January 1981Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of Rajasthan Pharmaceutical Laboratory, its partner and its manager for offences under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, including sale of unlicensed and sub‑standard drugs, failure to disclose source, and contravention of a prohibitory order. The High Court had imposed fines

VED PRAKASHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1980 INSC 22313 November 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ved Prakash, was convicted of a firearm offence arising from a land dispute. The trial court sentenced him without considering the provisions of Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the sentencing court had a

SOM PRAKASH REKHIversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1980 INSC 22013 November 1980Case Allowed

Som Prakash Rekhi, a clerk of Burmah Shell Oil Storage Ltd., retired with a pension of Rs.165.99 per month under a 1950 trust deed and was also covered by the Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952 and the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The employer deducted amounts for PF contributions and gratuity, reducing his pension t

WAMAN RAO & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 21613 November 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 and its subsequent amendments, which were placed in the Ninth Schedule, and whether the First and Fourth Amendments introducing Articles 31A and 31B violated the basic structure of the Constituti

ACCOUNTANT GENERAL & ANR. ETC. ETC.versusS. DORAISWAMY & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1980 INSC 22113 November 1980Disposed off

The Accountant General of Tamil Nadu and the Comptroller and Auditor‑General appealed against judgments that had allowed seniority claims by several former Upper Division Clerks who argued that their length of service should be counted under paragraph 143 of the Manual of Standing Orders. The respondents relied on a 19

TATA CONSULTING ENGINEERSversusWORKMEN EMPLOYED AND VICE-VERSA

1980 INSC 22213 November 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an award by the Maharashtra Industrial Tribunal that revised wage scales for Tata Consulting Engineers' workmen, made the revisions retrospective to 1 January 1976, and added a flat increase of Rs 150 for draughtsmen and Rs 100 for other categories. The workmen sought to have the flat increas

AJAY HASIA ETC.versusKHALID MUJIB SEHRAVARDI & ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 21813 November 1980Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the admission process of the Regional Engineering College, Srinagar, run by a society registered under the Jammu & Kashmir Societies Registration Act, alleging that the viva voce interview was arbitrary, that 33⅓% of total marks were allocated to it, and that the procedure violated Article 14

GUDA VIJAYALAKSHMIversusGUDA RAMCHANDRA SEKHARA SASTRY

1981 INSC 6813 March 1981

Guda Vijayalakshmi (petitioner) filed a maintenance suit in Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, while her husband filed a divorce suit under the Hindu Marriage Act in Udaipur, Rajasthan. The petitioner sought transfer of the divorce suit to Eluru under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) so that both matters could be he

VISHUNDAS HUNDUMAL, ETC.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

1981 INSC 6713 March 1981Case Allowed

The petitioners, holders of stage‑carriage permits under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, challenged Scheme No. 50‑M which reserved certain routes for exclusive operation by the Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation. When the scheme came into force, the permits of some operators whose routes overlapped the reserved ro

RADHAKANTA DEB & ANR.versusCOMMISSIONER OF HINDU RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENTS, ORISSA

1981 INSC 3313 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, members of the Pani family, owned a temple dedicated to the family deity Radhakanta Deb. They sued under s.62(2) of the Orissa Religious Endowment Act, 1939 to set aside a government order that declared the temple a public endowment governed by the Act. The trial court held the endowment to be private;

FRANCIS CORALIE MULLINversusTHE ADMINISTRATOR, UNION TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS.

1981 INSC 1113 January 1981Case Allowed

The petitioner, a British national detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (COFEPOSA), challenged the constitutional validity of clauses that limited her interviews with a lawyer and family members to a monthly schedule, required prior permission from the District Ma

SWADESHI COTTON MILLSversusUNION OF INDIA

1981 INSC 1013 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Swadeshi Cotton Mills challenged a Government order under Section 18AA of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, which authorised the National Textile Corporation to take over its management without a prior hearing. The Supreme Court examined whether the principle of audi alteram partem was implied in S

S. A. SUNDARARAJANversusA. P. V. RAJENDRAN

1981 INSC 1213 January 1981Dismissed

The appellant's property was attached and sold in execution of a decree. He claimed the sale proclamation contained several irregularities and filed an application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside the sale. The executing court agreed that the irregularities vitiated the sale and set it aside

S. K. SARKAR, MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, U.P., LUCKNOWversusVINAY CHANDRA MISRA

1980 INSC 23212 December 1980Dismissed

In a proceeding before the Uttar Pradesh Board of Revenue, the appellant S.K. Sarkar allegedly abused counsel Vinay Chandra Misra, using vulgar language, and was accused of committing criminal contempt of his own court and the High Court. Misra filed a petition under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and the Allahabad

GRINDLAYS BANK LTD.versusCENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND ORS.

1980 INSC 23312 December 1980Dismissed

The Central Government referred an industrial dispute between Grindlays Bank Ltd. and its workmen to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal under s.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. After several adjournments, the Tribunal refused a further adjournment on 9 December 1976 and passed an ex‑parte award, relying

OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAversusSMT. V. LAKSHMIKUTTY

1980 INSC 23412 December 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered two distinct matters. In Official Liquidator v. Lakshmikutty, the Court held that Section 529 of the Companies Act, 1956 incorporates the set‑off rule of Section 46 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, so that where a creditor and a company in winding up have mutual dealings, only the net bala

GOPALANACHARIversusSTATE OF KERALA

1980 INSC 21512 November 1980Case Allowed

Gopalana Chari, a 71‑year‑old inmate, filed a writ petition under Article 32 alleging illegal detention under Section 110 of the Criminal Procedure Code. He claimed he was taken from his home at night, held for ten days without trial, and labeled a "habitual" thief despite no conviction. The Court examined whether the

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusSK. BANNU AND SHANKAR

1980 INSC 18012 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra prosecuted Sk. Bannu, Shankar and Mohammad Nazir for forging a bail bond and affidavit in a bail application filed under the Bombay Prohibition Act. The first magistrate who granted bail later transferred the case to another magistrate, who, after discovering the forgery, filed a complaint unde

STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.versusLAL SINGH KISHAN SINGH

1980 INSC 15012 August 1980Dismissed

The State of Gujarat appealed a High Court order that quashed a circular directing police not to grant bail to persons arrested under sections 4 and 5 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act. The respondents were arrested by a Sub‑Inspector on a warrant issued under section 6 of the Act and were denied bail by the pol

SURJEET SINGH & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1981 INSC 6412 March 1981Case Allowed

Surjeet Singh and Kulwant Singh were detained under the National Security Ordinance and were served the grounds of their detention in English, a language they did not understand. Although a police officer orally explained the contents in Hindi, the Supreme Court held that this did not constitute effective communication

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSMT. MANBHAR ETC.

1981 INSC 6512 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan sought to file an application under CrPC section 378 for leave to appeal an acquittal in a murder case, which was filed by a Deputy Government Advocate (DGA). The Rajasthan High Court held that the DGA lacked locus standi as a Public Prosecutor and dismissed the application. On appeal, the Suprem

AHMEDABAD MANUFACTURING & CALICO PRINTING CO. LTD.versusWORKMEN & ANR.

1981 INSC 6612 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The Industrial Tribunal awarded a decision against Ahmedabad Manufacturing & Calico Printing Co. Ltd., which the company challenged by filing a special leave petition under Article 136 of the Constitution. The company later withdrew that petition, and four days thereafter filed a writ petition under Article 226 in the

MARU RAM ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1980 INSC 21211 November 1980

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Section 433A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which imposes a mandatory minimum of fourteen years’ imprisonment on two categories of life‑sentence convicts – those convicted of offences where death is a possible punishment and those whose death sentence was co

PREM CHANDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 21311 November 1980Case Allowed

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Delhi, invoked sections 47 and 50 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978 to issue an externment order against Prem Chand Paniwala, alleging that his presence in certain areas of Delhi posed a danger to residents. Paniwala challenged the order under Article 32, contending that the proceedings w

SHIDAGOUDA NINGAPPA GHANDAVARversusSTAIB OF KARNATAKA

1980 INSC 21411 November 1980Dismissed

Shildagouda Ningappa Ghandavar was convicted of murdering a young boy during a land dispute. Both the Sessions Court and the High Court sentenced him to death, providing special reasons. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the death penalty was excessive. The Court examined the nature of the crime

PRITAM NATH HOONversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1980 INSC 17811 September 1980Case Allowed

Pritam Nath Hoon was detained under Section 5(a) of the Conversion of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 after customs seized silver bars from him. While in custody he repeatedly requested copies of the statements and documents on which his detention was based so that he could make an eff

HAMIDA SARFARAZ QUREISHIversusM. S. KASBEKAR & OTHERS

1980 INSC 17911 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, the wife of Sarfaraz Maqbool Qureishi, filed a writ of habeas corpus under Article 32 challenging his preventive detention under Section 3 of the Prevention of Black‑Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980. The detenu, who was seriously ill and confined to the Intensive

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusPRATAP CHAND & ORS.

1981 INSC 6311 March 1981Dismissed

The State of Karnataka prosecuted three respondents – two partners and their firm – for allegedly providing a fictitious address of the supplier of a drug, violating sections 18(a)(ii), 18(c) and 18A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The prosecution relied on an inspector’s report that the address was fictitious, b

DUDH NATH PANDEYversusTHE STATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 2711 February 1981Case Partly allowed

Dudh Nath Pandey was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for shooting his brother-in-law, Pappoo Kishore, after a dispute over his desire to marry Pappoo's sister. The trial and appellate courts upheld the conviction and imposed the death penalty. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the rel

DR. C. GIRIJAMBALversusGOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1981 INSC 2811 February 1981Dismissed

Dr. C. Girijambal, a holder of a Diploma in Ayurvedic Medicine (D.A.M.), was initially appointed as a Medical Officer in a Zilla Parishad dispensary on a lower pay scale despite the advertisement indicating a higher scale for candidates with G.C.I.M. or L.I.M. qualifications. The High Court had earlier held that she wa

AKHILESH PRASADversusUNION TERRITORY OF MIZORAM

1981 INSC 2911 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Akhlsh Prasad, a member of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), was charged under IPC sections 307, 326 and 324 for allegedly firing on two persons on 30 May 1978. He sought to quash the proceedings, arguing that the offences were committed while he was acting in the discharge of his official duty as a member of th

LALAPPA LINGAPPA & ORS.versusLAXMI VISHNU TEXTILE MILLS LTD., SHOLAPUR

1981 INSC 3011 February 1981Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered claims for gratuity by 85 permanent and 25 badli employees of Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills who sought payment for every year of service irrespective of whether they had worked at least 240 days. The employer had paid gratuity only for years in which the employees were actually employed for 24

BHAGWAN DASS JAINversusUNION OF INDIA

1981 INSC 3111 February 1981Dismissed

Bhagwan Dass Jain, an assessee under the Income‑Tax Act, 1961, challenged the inclusion of a notional amount under section 23(2) for his self‑occupied house, arguing that no real income was derived and that the levy was in substance a tax on the building falling under Entry 49 of List II, which Parliament could not imp

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM. B. PATNAIK & ORS.

1981 INSC 3211 February 1981Case Allowed

The Supreme Court heard appeals by special leave against Orissa High Court judgments that had quashed the removal of several railway employees following disciplinary enquiries. The issues were whether a second enquiry on the merits could be held after an earlier order of reversion was set aside on a technical ground, a

RACHAPUDI SUBBA RAOversusTHE ADVOCATE-GENERAL, ANDHRA PRADESH

1980 INSC 23110 December 1980Dismissed

R. Subba Rao, having lost two suits before an Additional Sub‑Judge, issued a notice accusing the judge of bad faith, malice and bias and demanding damages. The judge referred the notice to the High Court, which, on the Advocate‑General's petition, convicted Rao of criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of

THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusD. J. BAHADUR & ORS.

1980 INSC 20910 November 1980Dismissed

The Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) and its workmen entered into two 1974 settlements under the Industrial Disputes Act (ID Act) that provided a cash bonus to Class III and IV employees. After the settlements expired, LIC issued notices under s.19(2) and s.9A of the ID Act and the Central Government amended Regulation

S. S. SHARMA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 21010 November 1980Dismissed

The petitioners, senior officers of the Central Secretariat Service, challenged the Central Secretariat Service (Amendment) Rules, 1979 and the regulations that introduced a limited departmental competitive examination exclusively for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates to fill 27 reserved Grade‑I promotion

ALIJAN NANHE PEHALWAN QURESHIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1980 INSC 21110 November 1980Dismissed

Alijan Nanhe Pehalwan Qureshi was convicted of murder under s.302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial court. The High Court affirmed the conviction but issued a judgment without any reasoning. A Special Leave Petition was filed before the Supreme Court, which held that in serious offences like murder, t

THE CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY, LUCKNOWversusALOKE MITRA

1980 INSC 20010 October 1980Appeal(s) allowed

M. Mitra transferred his publishing and printing businesses to two newly formed companies in 1953. He instructed that the shares be allotted to his wife, three sons, brother‑in‑law and an ex‑employee, but the consideration for the shares was paid entirely by Mitra. After Mitra's death in 1957, the estate duty return fi

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 17710 September 1980Case Allowed

The Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) supplied naphtha from its refinery at Barauni, Bihar to the fertilizer plant of Indian Explosives Ltd. at Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh via a pipeline, under a contract that required delivery against indents addressed to IOC's Kanpur installation. The Uttar Pradesh tax authorities treated the s

JETHABHAI KHATAU & CO.versusLUXMI NARAYAN COTTON MILLS LTD. & ORS.

1981 INSC 8910 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Jethabhai Khatau & Co. sued Luxmi Narayan Cotton Mills Ltd. for a decree of Rs. 2.85 lakh. The decree amount was to be paid from a fixed deposit of Rs. 8.40 lakh held by Grindlays Bank on behalf of a receiver. The High Court issued several interim orders directing the bank to pay the amount, but the bank failed to comp

STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHERversusRAM GOPAL SHUKLA

1981 INSC 9010 April 1981Dismissed

The appellant State of Uttar Pradesh challenged a High Court order that had declared Rules 7A and 7B of the Uttar Pradesh Promotion by Selection in Consultation with Public Service Commission (Procedure) Rules, 1970 ultra vires Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The rules gave preferential treatment to candidates

AELTEMESH REINversusCHANDULAL CHANDRAKAR & OTHERS

1981 INSC 6010 March 1981Dismissed

Aeltemesh Rein, a Lok Sabha candidate, filed an election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, claiming to have deposited the required security of Rs.2,000 as mandated by Section 117, although no deposit was actually made. The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition for non‑c

KHATRI & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1981 INSC 6110 March 1981

The petitioners, undertrials, alleged that police blinded them while in custody and sought compensation under Article 21. They requested CID reports and related documents, which the State refused to produce citing protection under Sections 162 and 172 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Supreme Court held that the repo

COMMODORE COMMANDING, SOUTHERN NAVAL AREA, COCHINversusV. K. RAJAN

1981 INSC 5810 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, V.K. Rajan, was a temporary government servant who rose from casual labourer to Ammunition Repair Labourer, Grade II, and was later terminated. He challenged the termination under Article 226, alleging that his appointment was permanent and that terminating him while juniors remained in service was disc

DEV RAJ DOGRA AND ORS.versusGYAN CHAND JAIN AND ORS.

1981 INSC 5910 March 1981

The case involved a mortgaged bungalow that, after a compromise decree allowing sale on default, was leased to three tenants. When the mortgagor failed to pay, the bank sold the property at a court auction and the highest bidder, Gyan Chand Jain, obtained a sale certificate. Jain applied under Order XXI Rules 95 and 96

RAM MANORATHversusSTATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 6210 March 1981Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a December 5, 1973 incident in Bhawanipur where four persons were killed during a clash involving an alleged unlawful assembly of about twelve men. Twelve accused were charged under IPC sections 302 and 149; the trial court convicted eight, sentencing two (Chhotey and Ram Manorath) to death and the

M. LACHIA SETTY & SONS LTD. ETC. ETC.versusTHE COFFEE BOARD, BANGALORE

1980 INSC 1969 October 1980Dismissed

The Coffee Board conducts pool auctions for coffee where bids are submitted in sealed forms and the Sale Conducting Officer (the Chief Marketing Officer) decides the successful bidders. M. L. Lachia Setty & Sons Ltd. and Giri Coffee Works had their bids accepted despite not being the highest, but later failed to take d

RAMJI DAYAWALA & SONS (P) LTD.versusINVEST IMPORT

1980 INSC 1979 October 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Ramji Dayawala & Sons entered into a sub‑contract with Yugoslavian firm Invest Import that contained a clause referring all disputes to arbitration before the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris. After completing the work, the Indian contractor sued for unpaid sums, and Invest Import moved to stay the suit on th

JODH SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1980 INSC 1989 October 1980Dismissed

Flt Lt. Panj Rattan Singh, an Indian Air Force officer, died in service. He had executed a will bequeathing his property to his father and had nominated his parents and siblings for provident fund and pension benefits, but not his wife. The widow, Hardev Kaur, was granted a special family pension under Rule 74 of the A

ICHHU DEVI CHORARIAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1759 September 1980Case Allowed

Mahendra Chordia was detained under the COFEPOSA Act on 4 June 1980 to prevent alleged smuggling. He repeatedly requested copies of statements, documents and tape recordings referred to in the grounds of detention so he could make an effective representation, but the authorities supplied these only on 11 July and the t

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, LUCKNOWversusP. K. BANERJEE (DEAD) BY LRS.

1980 INSC 1769 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Commissioner of Wealth Tax, challenged the assessee P. K. Banerjee's claim that his right to receive the net income of a family trust fund was an annuity exempt under section 2(e)(iv) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The trust, created by Banerjee's father in 1937 and modified in 1950, paid the net income of

SMT. KHATOON BEGUM ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1981 INSC 569 March 1981Case Allowed

Three writ petitions under Article 32 challenged the detention of individuals under the National Security Act, alleging that the authorities delayed consideration of their representations under Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The petitioners had made representations within days of detention, but the authorities eith

LAXMI KHANDSARI ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1981 INSC 579 March 1981Dismissed

In Uttar Pradesh, a severe sugar shortage prompted the Cane Commissioner to issue a notification under clause 8 of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, banning all power crushers in the reserved areas of sugar mills from 9 Oct 1980 to 1 Dec 1980, except those described as ‘vertical’. The petitioners, owners of such cru

ASHOK KUMAR & ORS.versusI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, NAINITAL & ORS.

1981 INSC 89 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, landlords of a building occupied by tenant Keshar Singh who ran Hotel Waldrof, obtained a decree for his eviction due to rent default. Anticipating vacancy, they filed an application under Section 16(1)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 to have

AJITSINGH THAKURSINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1981 INSC 99 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Ajit Singh, his son Balwant Singh and another son Mohan Singh were tried for the murder of Manilal and injuries to his brothers. The trial court acquitted them, finding the prosecution evidence unreliable and giving them the benefit of doubt. The State filed an appeal after the limitation period had expired; the Gujara

COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, GUJARATversusUNION MEDICAL AGENCY

1980 INSC 1958 October 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Union Medical Agency, a dealer registered under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, claimed a deduction under section 8(ii) for resales of goods purchased from a dealer registered only under the Central Sales Tax Act. The Sales Tax Officer disallowed the claim, the Tribunal upheld the disallowance, and the Gujarat High Court rev

JAMNAPRASAD KANHAIYALALversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, M.P., BHOPAL

1981 INSC 1148 May 1981Reference answered

The assessee, a partnership firm, was found to have cash credits of Rs.46,250 in its books in the names of five minor sons of the managing partner. The Income Tax Officer treated these as unexplained cash credits and added them to the firm's income under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The firm argued that the

S.S. DHANOAversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION, DELHI & ORS.

1981 INSC 1158 May 1981Dismissed

S.S. Dhanoa, an IAS officer, was deputed as General Manager of the Super Bazaars run by the Cooperative Store Ltd., a society registered under the Bombay Cooperative Societies Act. He was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling adulterated honey and argued that he was a public servant under cl

S.S. MOGHE & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1981 INSC 1168 May 1981Dismissed

The petitioners, who were directly recruited on a temporary basis to the Aviation Research Centre (ARC) between 1965‑71, challenged the legality of promotions granted to deputation officers (respondents 8‑67) from 1968‑75, the constitutionality of the Aviation Research Centre (Technical) Service Rules, 1976 (Rules 6‑8,

SMT. SOORAJ DEVIversusPYARE LAL AND ANR.

1981 INSC 68 January 1981Dismissed

The appellant, a widow, claimed possession of a house that had been sold at auction to the first respondent. After the second respondent, her son, entered the house, he was convicted of trespass and the High Court ordered the house restored to the first respondent. The appellant objected to this order in a civil procee

P. KASILINGAMversusP.S.G. COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY

1981 INSC 58 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

P. Kasilingam, a probationary lecturer at P.S.G. College of Technology, was facing a departmental enquiry for alleged dereliction of duty. On the morning the enquiry was to begin, he submitted a letter of apology and an unconditional resignation at the college correspondent's residence, apparently as part of a deal to

STATE OF GUJARATversusCHAMANLAL MANJIBHAI SONI

1981 INSC 78 January 1981Dismissed

The respondent, C.M. Soni, was detained under section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) on 20 October 1978. The order of detention listed several grounds, one of which (ground No. 7) was held by the Gujarat High Court to be irrelevant, leading the High

KARBALAI BEGUMversusMOHD. SAYEED AND ANR.

1980 INSC 1947 October 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Karbalai Begum, a widow, claimed joint possession of two plots of land that she and her late husband's cousins (Mohd. Bashir and Mohd. Rasheed) owned as co‑sharers after the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition Act. She alleged that the defendants, who managed the land while she lived in Lucknow, fraudulently caused her n

INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1497 August 1980Case Partly allowed

Industrial Supplies Pvt. Ltd. and another company were managing/raising contractors of two coking coal mines under long‑term agreements that required them to install machinery and other plant. The mines were taken over by the Central Government under the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972. The contractors cl

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusAJUDHIA NATH AND ANR.

1981 INSC 1107 May 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab sought recovery of still‑head duty from liquor vendors Ajudhia Nath and others who had failed to lift the quota of country liquor and to deposit the duty as required by Condition 8 of their licences. The vendors contended that still‑head duty was an excise duty that could be levied only on manufactu

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusKRISHNA BHIMA WALVAKAR & ANR.

1981 INSC 1127 May 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka appealed against the High Court's setting aside of a confiscation order of a 7,200 kg consignment of groundnut oil. The oil had been seized because the transporter failed to file the mandatory Form II declaration with the Tehsildar before the consignment left the place, as required by Clause 3(2)

JAGRUP SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1981 INSC 1137 May 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Jagrup Singh struck his uncle Chanan Singh on the head with the blunt side of a gandhala during a marriage ceremony, causing a fatal head injury. The trial court convicted him of murder under s.302 IPC, a decision affirmed by the High Court, which held that the prosecution had proved intention to cause a bodily injury

M.M. QUASIMversusMANOHAR LAL SHARMA & ORS.

1981 INSC 837 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a tenant, was sued for eviction by the respondents under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 on grounds of personal requirement (to open a clinic) and alleged rent default for three months. The trial court ordered eviction, and the appellate court dismissed the appeal, ignori

BARENDRA PRASAD RAY & ORS.versusTHE INCOME-TAX OFFICER 'A' WARD FOREIGN SECTION AND ORS.

1981 INSC 847 April 1981Dismissed

The appellants, partners of an Indian law firm, were engaged by a German corporation and, through London solicitors, allowed a UK barrister, Mr. Blanco White, to appear in three Calcutta High Court suits. Although the firm did not brief or pay the barrister, the Income Tax Officer treated them as agents under section 1

AHMED IBRAHIM SAHIGRA DHORAJIversusCOMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, GUJARAT

1981 INSC 867 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The assessee, Ahmed Ibrahim Sahigra Dhoraji, possessed concealed income of Rs 7 lakhs earned between 1957‑58 and 1964‑65. He made a voluntary disclosure under Section 68 of the Finance Act 1965 and paid tax at the prescribed rate. He claimed that the tax paid could be deducted as a "debt owed" under Section 2(m) of the

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, AMRITSARversusSURESH SETH

1981 INSC 877 April 1981Dismissed

The Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Amritsar appealed against a High Court order that had ruled in favour of Suresh Seth, who had filed his wealth‑tax returns for 1964‑65 and 1965‑66 years several years late. The department had levied penalties under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth Tax Act, applying different rates for peri

HINDUSTAN BROWN BOVERI LTD. ETC.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1981 INSC 887 April 1981Dismissed

The appellants, Hindustan Brown Boveri Ltd. and Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd., were recognised dealers under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act who purchased raw materials using Form 19 certificates stating the materials would be used to manufacture taxable goods for sale within Gujarat. They later sold part of the manufactured g

NATRAJ STUDIOS (P) LTD.versusNAVRANG STUDIOS & ANR.

1981 INSC 47 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Natraj Studios (P) Ltd. held a "leave and licence" agreement with Navrang Studios for the use of two film studios, associated premises and equipment. After Navrang sought possession in 1979, Natraj filed a suit in the Court of Small Causes claiming to be a monthly tenant, and also challenged the arbitration clause in t

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusWASUDEO RAMCHANDRA KAIDALWAR

1981 INSC 1096 May 1981Dismissed

The respondent, a Range Forest Officer earning Rs.515 per month, was found in possession of assets worth over Rs.79,000 and was charged under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for having assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. He claimed the assets belonged

KSHITISH CHANDRA BOSEversusCOMMISSIONER OF RANCHI

1981 INSC 266 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Kshitis Chandra Bose sued the Ranchi Municipality for declaration of title and possession of plot No. 1735, claiming title by a 1912 Hukumnama and by prescription after 30 years of continuous, open, hostile possession. The trial court and the Additional Judicial Commissioner upheld his claim on both title and adverse p

NEW BIHAR BIRI LEAVES CO. & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1981 INSC 16 January 1981Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the Bihar Kendu Leaves (Control of Trade) Act, 1973, which created a state monopoly over the sale of Kendu leaves for bidi manufacturing. The petitioners, traders in Kendu leaves, challenged Clause 13 (a minimum royalty of 75% of the estimated yield) and Clause 4(bb) (purchasers could not obj

RAMA NAND AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

1981 INSC 26 January 1981Dismissed

Rama Nand was convicted for the murder of his wife Sumitra under Section 302 IPC, with co‑accused Shish Ram and Kali Datt convicted under Section 201 IPC. The prosecution relied on a series of circumstantial facts: a strong motive demonstrated by threatening letters, Sumitra’s last sighting with the accused, the planti

KAMLA KANAHIYALAL KHUSHALANIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

1981 INSC 36 January 1981Case Allowed

The petitioner, K. K. Khushalani, was detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 on 20‑10‑1980. Although the grounds of detention were served, the documents and materials on which the order relied were supplied only on 05‑11‑1980, and the detenu's representation

MALAK SINGH ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & HARYANA & ORS.

1980 INSC 2305 December 1980Dismissed

The appellants, Malak Singh and Jaswant Singh, challenged the inclusion of their names in a police surveillance register maintained under the Punjab Police Rules, alleging that the entry was made without any material basis and violated their fundamental right to privacy under Articles 21 and 19(1)(d) of the Constitutio

B. S. YADAV AND OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ETC,

1980 INSC 2075 November 1980Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined disputes between promotee and direct‑recruit judicial officers in Punjab and Haryana over seniority, confirmation and probation. The petitioners argued that the High Court improperly applied a rotation system at confirmation, violating the quota rule and their constitutional rights. The Court

CHET RAM VASHISTversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR.

1980 INSC 2085 November 1980Disposed off

The appellant sought to amend a previously sanctioned layout plan for his land to include a cinema, filing an application under section 313 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 on 20 April 1967. The Municipal Corporation’s Standing Committee neither sanctioned nor rejected the application within the statutory 6

REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER CHITTOOR ETC.versusASSOCIATED TRANSPORT, MADRAS (P) LTD. & ORS.

1980 INSC 1745 September 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether Section 4(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles (Taxation of Passengers and Goods) Act, 1952 empowered the State Government to make rules with retrospective effect. The State had deleted certain sub‑rules, making the deletion operative from a date earlier than its enactment, and sou

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