Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

P N BHAGWATI

156 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

INDIAN AND EASTERN NEWSPAPER SOCIETY, NEW DELHIversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

1979 INSC 16331 August 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society, a registered society that owned a building with a hall and rooms let out for rent, had its income from these facilities assessed as business income for the years 1960‑61 to 1963‑64. During a departmental audit, the Income Tax Department’s internal audit unit opined that such re

CEMENT MARKETING CO. OF INDIA LTD.versusASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF SALES-TAX, INDORE &ORS.

1979 INSC 22530 October 1979Case Partly allowed

Cement Marketing Co. of India Ltd. sold cement under the Cement Control Order, charging freight as part of a "free on rail destination" price that was paid by purchasers and deducted from invoices. The company omitted the freight amount from its sales‑tax returns, believing it was not part of the sale price. The Assist

GANESHMAL JASHRAJversusGOVT. OF GUJARAT ANP ANR.

1979 INSC 22730 October 1979Appeal(s) allowed

Ganeshlal Jashraj was charged under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated turmeric powder to a food inspector. He pleaded not guilty, but after the prosecution evidence closed he was examined under section 313 of the CrPC and, via plea‑bargaining, submitted an appl

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusGODFREY PHILIPS INDIA LTD. ETC, ETC.

1985 INSC 21130 September 1985

The respondents, cigarette manufacturers, packed cigarettes in primary packets, secondary cartons and finally in corrugated fibre‑board containers and argued that the cost of the final containers should not be part of the "value" for excise duty. The Union of India contended that all packing, whether primary or seconda

C.K. NARAYANA CHARYversusPOTHEPALLI ASHANNA & ORS.

1985 INSC 21230 September 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a notification issued under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 18 October 1979, which was published in the Official Gazette the same day. The Revenue Divisional Officer directed that public notice of the notification's substance be given in the locality on 19 November 1979, and

JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVT, OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusFOOD SPECIALITIES LTD.

1985 INSC 21330 September 1985Dismissed

Food Specialities Ltd manufactured various dairy and food products for Nestle's Products India Ltd under Nestle's registered trademarks and supplied them at a wholesale price (free on rail or free on lorry). The dispute arose over the valuation of these goods for the purpose of levying excise duty under the Central Exc

BHAGWANT P. SULAKHEversusDIGAMBAR GOPAL SULAKHE AND ORS.

1985 INSC 21430 September 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a long‑standing dispute among members of the Sulakhe joint family concerning whether various incomes and assets derived from a partnership firm (Sulakhe & Co.) and a public limited company (Lokmanya Mills Ltd.) belonged to the joint family or to individual members. The Court held that remuner

INDRAJIT BARIJA & ORS. ETC.versusELECTION COMMLSSION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 21030 September 1985Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the 1983 Assam Legislative Assembly election, alleging that the electoral rolls of 1979 were defective because they had not been revised as required by the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and allegedly contained non‑citizens. They filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitut

SOOSAI ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 21530 September 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the Adi‑Dravida caste who had converted to Christianity, were denied free bunks under a central welfare scheme for Scheduled Castes because a Tamil Nadu order incorporated paragraph 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, which excludes persons of religions other than Hinduism

KASTURJ LAL HARLALversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1986 INSC 22229 October 1986Dismissed

The appellants, registered coal dealers under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, collected sales tax from purchasers after coal became taxable in 1965, but were later held not liable for tax and sought a refund of the amounts deposited. The Sales Tax Officer rejected the refund claim, relying on Section 29-A, which permits refund

SURINDER SINGHversusHARDIAL SINGH AND ORS.

1984 INSC 20229 October 1984Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1980 Punjab Legislative Assembly election, Surinder Singh was elected but his victory was challenged on two grounds of corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, 1951: (1) alleged "undue influence" for disturbing an Akali Party meeting with firearms, and (2) alleged "bribery" for promising to h

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

S.P. GUPTA & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1981 INSC 20928 December 1981Dismissed

The case involved multiple writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of a circular letter issued by the Law Minister on March 18, 1981, seeking consent from additional judges for appointment to other High Courts, short-term extensions of additional judges, and transfers of Chief Justices. The Court address

DR. P. NALLA THAMPY THERA.versusB.L. SHANKER & OTHERS

1983 INSC 16528 October 1983Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition that had been dismissed for the petitioner's failure to appear and produce evidence, despite statutory mandates for disposal within six months. The petitioner sought to delete a specific prayer, and the High Court allowed the deletion and later permitted withdrawal of a r

DR. P. NALLA THAMBY THERAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 16628 October 1983Disposed off

The petitioner, a railway commuter, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the Union of India to implement the recommendations of the Kunzru, Wanchoo and Sikri Committee reports, appoint a fact‑finding commission and improve railway safety, invoking Articles 19 and 21. The Union, through a

KAPURCHAND SHRIMALversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH,HYDERABAD

1981 INSC 15328 August 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The Hindu undivided family of Kapurchand Shrimal claimed that its joint family property had been partitioned, sending letters to the Income‑Tax Officer on 10 Oct 1960, 16 Jun 1961 and 11 Mar 1962. Despite these timely claims, assessment orders for the years 1955‑56 to 1958‑59 were completed without the inquiry mandated

ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE) BOMBAYversusBABU MIYA SHEIKH IMAM AND ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 8428 July 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Assistant Collector of Customs intercepted a fishing vessel carrying 194 ingots of silver, suspecting smuggling. The accused were convicted under several statutes, including section 135(1)(a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Bombay High Court set aside the conviction under the Customs Act, holding that the phrase

SHRL SUNIL SLDDHARTHBHAL ETCversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD ETC.

1985 INSC 20727 September 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a partner in two different partnership firms, contributed shares of limited companies to the firms as capital. The Revenue argued that the contribution constituted a transfer of a capital asset under section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that a capital gain arose because the market value of the shar

LAXMI KANT PANDEYversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1985 INSC 20827 September 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard applications filed by social and child welfare agencies seeking clarification of the principles and procedures it had laid down in Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India for inter‑country adoption of Indian children. The agencies raised thirteen specific points, ranging from the separation of scrut

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusCLBATUL LIMITED

1985 INSC 20927 September 1985Dismissed

Cibatul Ltd (the seller) entered into agreements with Ciba Geigy of India Ltd (the buyer) to manufacture various resins under a jointly drawn programme. The buyer tested and approved each batch before the seller could sell the goods to it, and the buyer’s trade‑marks were affixed on approved goods. The seller declared

CHHOTELAL PYARELAL THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM AND ORS.versusSHIKHARCHAND

1984 INSC 13127 July 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed an eviction application under Clause 13(3)(vi) and (vii) of the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 against the partnership firm M/s Chhotelal Pyarelal. The firm contended that the application was not maintainable because the partners were not joined as responde

ATAM PRAKASHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1986 INSC 2427 February 1986Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 15 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 (as applied in Haryana), which gave a right of pre-emption based on consanguinity. Petitioners argued that the classification violated Articles 14, 15 and 19(1)(f) of the Constitution, while the State defended it on

D. CAWASJI AND CO. MYSOREversusTHE STATE OF MYSORE AND ANR.

1984 INSC 17826 September 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, excise contractors licensed to sell arrack, challenged the State of Mysore's collection of sales tax on the total price of arrack, which included excise duty and cesses. The Mysore High Court held that sales tax could not be levied on excise duty, health cess or education cess and ordered a refund of 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 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

MRS. MARY ROY ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

1986 INSC 2226 February 1986Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Travancore Christian Succession Act, 1092 continued to govern intestate succession for Indian Christians in the former State of Travancore after the Part B States (Laws) Act, 1951 extended the Indian Succession Act, 1925 to that territory. The petitioners challenged sections 24, 2

MOPED INDIA LTD.versusTHE ASSTT. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NELLORE AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 3626 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Moped India Ltd manufactured mopeds and sold them to a network of dealers under agreements that allowed the dealers a commission of Rs.110, Rs.145 or Rs.165 per unit, which the company treated as a trade discount and deducted from the price list for excise duty purposes. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise held t

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

BHAGWANT SINGHversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANR.

1985 INSC 10325 April 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether a person who lodges a First Information Report (FIR) is entitled to notice and a hearing when a magistrate considers the police report under Section 173(2)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Code and decides to drop the proceedings. It held that if the magistrate chooses not to take cogniza

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusVISVESWARAYA IRON & STEEL LTD.

1986 INSC 25024 November 1986Dismissed

The petitioners filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) on 7 July 1985 without explaining the delay in seeking relief. The case originated from a certified copy sent by the Collector of Central Excise to the Ministry of Finance, which was subsequently routed to the Ministry of Law after a series of administrative delays.

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.versusNANDLAL JAISWAL & ORS.

1986 INSC 21724 October 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the State of Madhya Pradesh's policy decision of 30 December 1984 to privatise nine state‑owned liquor distilleries by granting D‑2 licences to existing contractors for constructing new distilleries and D‑1 licences for wholesale supply. The petitioners challenged the decision on grounds of a

ALLAHABAD CANNING CO.versusUNION OF INDIA

1984 INSC 12724 July 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Allahabad Canning Co., a manufacturer of syrups and related food products, purchased levy sugar from K.M. Sugar Mills at a price higher than the controlled price. The excess amount of Rs 22,681.88 recovered by the High Court registrar was credited to the Levy Sugar Price Equalisation Fund under the Levy Sugar Price

ONKARLAL NANDLALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

1985 INSC 20123 September 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a registered dealer, purchased poppy seeds on a Form ST‑17 declaration stating they were for "resale within the State" and subsequently resold them in Bhawani Mandi. The Commercial Tax Officer held that because the resales were sales in the course of inter‑State trade, they could not be treated as "resal

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(

CENTRAL COAL FIELDS LTD. ETC.versusBHUBANESWAR SINGH & ORS.

1984 INSC 15423 August 1984Dismissed

The partnership firm that owned the Tariya coking coal mine had its management taken over by the Central Government in October 1971 under the Emergency Ordinance, later replaced by the Management Act. The Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1971 extinguished the owners' title effective 1 May 1972 and provided comp

P.S. MAHAL & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1984 INSC 11323 May 1984Case Allowed

The case concerned the inter‑se seniority of Executive Engineers in the Central Public Works Department who had been promoted from the grades of Assistant Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer. The petitioners challenged the Executive Engineers, Central Engineering and Central Electrical Engineering Service (Group

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

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

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusATIC INDUSTRIES LIMITED

1984 INSC 11622 June 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India challenged a demand for differential excise duty on dyes manufactured by ATIC Industries Ltd., arguing that the definition of "related person" in the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 was unconstitutional and that ATIC's wholesale buyers, Atul Products Ltd. and Crescent Dyes & Chemicals Ltd., were "r

DR. PRADEEP JAIN ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 11722 June 1984Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether state-imposed domicile or residence requirements for admission to MBBS and postgraduate medical courses violated the Constitution’s guarantee of equality. It held that wholesale reservation based solely on domicile is unconstitutional, but a limited reservation of up to 70% of seats (

H.D. VORAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1984 INSC 4422 February 1984Dismissed

The appellant was allotted a flat in 1951 under an order of requisition issued by the State Government under the Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, without the order specifying a public purpose. He occupied the flat, paying rent irregularly, and later the building was purchased by the third respondent who sought derequ

RAM KUMAR MISRAversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12421 September 1983Case Allowed

The petitioner, on behalf of workmen employed on two ferries operating at Bhagalpur and Sultanganj, alleged that they were not paid the minimum wages prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The key question was whether the ferries qualified as "establishments" within the meaning of the amended Entry 27 of the Act

DINESH KUMAR & ORS.versusMOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE, ALLAHABAD & ORS

1986 INSC 14921 July 1986Modified

The Supreme Court revisited its earlier judgment on reservation in medical colleges, directing that at least 15% of MBBS/BDS seats and 25% of postgraduate seats in each college be filled through an All‑India Entrance Examination conducted in English. It modified the formula for non‑reserved seats, rejecting state deman

BEHARILAL RAMCHARANversusINCOME-TAX OFFICER, SPECIAL CIRCLE B WARD, KANPUR AND ANR.

1981 INSC 11721 July 1981Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, a partnership firm, had a running account with B.R. Sons Ltd. The Income‑Tax Officer issued a notice under s.226(3)(i) of the Income‑Tax Act requiring the petitioners to pay any amount due from them to B.R. Sons Ltd., but the notice did not specify the exact sum. The petitioners filed a sworn affidavit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX (LAW) BOARD OF REVENUE (TAXES)versusPADINJARAKARA AGENCIES

1985 INSC 921 January 1985Dismissed

The respondent, Padinjara Kara Agencies, had purchased goods before 30 June 1974 and later sold them in inter‑state trade. The Kerala General Sales Tax Act increased the purchase tax rate from 3% to 5% effective 1 July 1974. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the respondent could be taxed on those pre‑June

MOHD. MUMTAZversusNANDINI SATPATHY AND ORS.

1986 INSC 27720 December 1986Dismissed

The appellant, Mohd. Mumtaz, challenged the order allowing the withdrawal of prosecution against respondent Nandini Satpathy under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Satpathy had been charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act for possessing assets disproportionate to her known income. The Special Public P

MOHD. MUMTAZversusNANDINI SATPATHY AND ORS.

1986 INSC 27820 December 1986Dismissed

The case concerned an alleged misappropriation of funds collected for party souvenirs by the former Chief Minister of Orissa, Nandini Satpathy. After a vigilance case was filed and charges under the IPC were framed, the state government decided to withdraw politically motivated prosecutions. The Special Public Prosecut

SHEO NANDAN PASWANversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1986 INSC 27920 December 1986Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of a consent order under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which allowed the withdrawal of prosecution against Dr. Jagannath Misra and others. The Court considered whether the public prosecutor acted independently, whether the magistrate properly exercised its

DR. D.C. WADHWA & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1986 INSC 28020 December 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar repeatedly repromulgated ordinances after each legislative session was prorogued, keeping the same provisions in force for years without converting them into statutes. Four petitioners, including a professor and affected individuals, challenged the constitutional validity of three specific ordinances

M.C. MEHTA AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1986 INSC 28120 December 1986Disposed off

The petitioners filed a writ under Article 32 seeking the closure of Shriram Foods & Fertilizers' hazardous units. During the proceedings oleum gas escaped, prompting the Delhi Legal Aid Board and Delhi Bar Association to file applications for compensation on behalf of victims. The Court examined the scope of Article 3

ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & OTHERS ETC.versusMADRAS RUBBER FACTORY LTD.

1986 INSC 28520 December 1986Disposed off

Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. (MRF) claimed a series of post‑manufacturing deductions – including TAC/Warranty discount, product discounts, interest on stock and receivables, overriding commission, distribution costs, government price differentials, secondary packaging charges and excise duty on processed tyre cord – to r

SHEELA BARSEversusSECRETARY, CHILDREN AID SOCIETY & OTHERS

1986 INSC 28620 December 1986Disposed off

Sheela Barse, a freelance journalist, filed a writ petition challenging the operation of observation homes run by the Children’s Aid Society, Bombay, alleging that children were forced to work without pay, faced hazardous conditions, and suffered delays in repatriation. The Bombay High Court issued directions to improv

P. SAMBAMURTHY & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.

1986 INSC 28320 December 1986Case Allowed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of clause (5) of Article 371‑D, which required a state government’s confirmation for an Administrative Tribunal’s order to become effective and allowed the government to modify or annul such orders. The Court held that while clause (3) establishing the Tribunal was

SATISH SABHARWAL & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC.

1986 INSC 28420 December 1986Dismissed

The petitioners, exporters of frozen meat, obtained permission from the Collector under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 to convert agricultural land near Bhiwandi into a non‑agricultural abattoir and cold‑storage facility. Villagers objected, citing potential pollution of a river used for drinking

DEWAN DAULAT RAI KAPOOR ETC. ETC.versusNEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE & ANOTHER ETC. ETC.

1979 INSC 27220 December 1979Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court considered three appeals challenging house‑tax assessments of buildings that were subject to the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, but for which no standard rent had been fixed. The revenue argued that the landlord could reasonably expect to receive the contractual rent and that this should determine the

BANWASI SEWA ASHRAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1986 INSC 24620 November 1986Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard a petition filed by Banwasi Seva Ashram on behalf of Adivasis living in Dudhi and Robertsganj tehsils of Mirzapur district, who claimed possession of forest lands that the State of Uttar Pradesh had declared as reserved forest under sections 20 and 4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. The petition

ACHARYA JAGDISHWARANAND AVADHUTA, ETC.versusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CALCUTTA & ANR.

1983 INSC 15320 October 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the Ananda Marga socio‑spiritual organization, sought a writ directing the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, to allow them to hold public processions accompanied by the Tandava dance. They claimed that Ananda Marga is a separate religion and that the Tandava dance is an essential religious r

SANJIT ROYversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1983 INSC 520 January 1983Case Allowed

The Rajasthan Public Works Department employed workers from a drought‑stricken area to construct the Madanganj Harmara Road as famine relief, paying wages based on a work‑norm such that workers whose gangs failed to meet the norm received less than the statutory minimum wage of Rs.7 per day. The petitioners challenged

POURNAMI OIL MILLS, ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR.

1986 INSC 27419 December 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The Kerala Government issued two notifications under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 offering tax concessions to new small‑scale industries. The first, dated 11 April 1979, promised exemption from both sales tax and purchase tax for five years from the start of production. The second, dated 29 September 1980 (ga

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

BIHAR LEGAL SUPPORT SOCIETYversusTHE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA & ANR.

1986 INSC 24119 November 1986Disposed off

The Bihar Legal Support Society filed a writ petition seeking that special leave petitions (SLPs) against orders refusing bail or anticipatory bail be listed immediately, arguing that "small men" should receive the same urgency as industrialists. The Supreme Court held that the decision to list such SLPs urgently lies

B. S. MINHASversusINDIAN STATISTICAL INSTITUTE & ORS.

1983 INSC 15119 October 1983Case Allowed

The petitioners challenged the appointment of Shri B.P. Adhikari as Director of the Indian Statistical Institute (ISI) on the grounds that the ISI, being a body controlled by the Union Government, is a "state" or "other authority" under Article 12 and therefore subject to judicial review under Article 32. They also con

MALABAR FISHERIES CO., CALICUTversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALA

1979 INSC 18719 September 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved Malabar Fisheries Co., a partnership dissolved in 1963, which had claimed development rebate under section 33 of the Income‑Tax Act for machinery installed before dissolution. The Income‑Tax Officer withdrew the rebate under section 34(3)(b) and section 155(5), contending that the distribution of the

UKHARA ESTATE ZAMINDARIES (PVT.) LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL, CALCUTTA

1979 INSC 18819 September 1979Appeal(s) allowed

Ukhara Estate Zamindaries (Pvt.) Ltd. was incorporated to take over a zamindari estate and issue shares to the lessors. It granted long‑term sub‑leases of coal‑bearing lands to collieries, receiving salami, premium and compensation for compulsory acquisitions. The Income‑Tax Officer treated these receipts as business i

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

MUNNA & OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ETC.

1982 INSC 519 January 1982Hearing Adjourned

Three writ petitions under Article 32 were filed after a newspaper report alleged that juvenile under‑trial prisoners under 16 years were being kept in Kanpur Central Jail and sexually exploited by adult inmates, despite the existence of a Children’s Home. The Allahabad High Court ordered a Sessions Judge to investigat

MOHINDER KUMAR ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1985 INSC 19718 September 1985Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of Section 1(3) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, as amended in 1978, which exempts buildings whose construction was completed on or after the Act’s commencement from its provisions for ten years. They argued that the provision creates

PEOPLE'S UNION FOR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1982 INSC 6718 September 1982Case Allowed

The People's Union for Democratic Rights filed a public‑interest writ petition alleging that contractors engaged in the construction of Asian Games projects in Delhi were violating multiple labour statutes, including the Minimum Wages Act, Equal Remuneration Act, Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, Employme

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM/S MODI RUBBER LIMITED

1986 INSC 17318 August 1986Disposed off

Modi Rubber Ltd, a tyre manufacturer, claimed that two Government notifications (1974 and 1981) exempted it from all forms of excise duty, including special and additional duties levied under various Finance Acts. The Central Government and the Revenue argued that the phrase "duty of excise" in those notifications refe

SHIELA KAUSHISHversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI

1981 INSC 14218 August 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Shiela Kaushish, a taxpayer, constructed a warehouse in Delhi and let it out to the American Embassy under several leases, eventually receiving a total rent of Rs.34,797 per month from April 1968. For the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71, the Income‑Tax Officer treated the actual rent received as the "annual value"

STATE OF KERALAversusJAY ENGINEERING WORKS LTD., ERNAKULAM

1983 INSC 1218 February 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala appealed against the High Court's decision in a dispute with Jay Engineering Works Ltd. concerning the timing of a claim for deduction under Rule 9(b)(i) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, 1963 for goods returned by purchasers. The Supreme Court examined whether such a deduction should be claime

SMT. J. S. RUKMANI ETC.versusGOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

1984 INSC 19517 October 1984Case Allowed

The widows of former Madras State government servants who retired before the 1956 reorganisation sought family pension under the Tamil Nadu Notification of 26 May 1979. The Tamil Nadu Government later issued a clarification (G.O. MS/63, 18 March 1982) that denied pension where the servant’s last posting was in a territ

COROMANDEL FERTILIZERS LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1984 INSC 14617 August 1984Dismissed

Coromandel Fertilizers Ltd., a manufacturer of various fertilizers, appointed selling agents (E.I.D. Parry Ltd. and Rallis India Ltd.) who received a 3.5% commission on net realizable value for arranging sales. The company claimed (1) exemption from excise duty on its product Gromor NPK 14‑35‑14 under Notification No. 

GANU RAMversusRIKHI RAM KAUNDAL AND ORS.

1984 INSC 12317 July 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Ganu Ram contested a Himachal Pradesh assembly seat reserved for Scheduled Castes. His nomination form did not contain the statutory caste declaration, but he attached a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate's certificate stating he belonged to the Lohar caste. The Returning Officer accepted the nomination and Ganu Ram was elected

R.S. NAYAKversusA.R. ANTULAY & ANR.

1986 INSC 8617 April 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a criminal appeal by R.S. Nayak against former Maharashtra Chief Minister A.R. Antulay concerning the framing of charges under sections 120B, 161, 165, 384, and 420 of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The trial judge had framed 21 charges and discharged the respondent on 22 other

MANCHEGOWDA ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA ETC.

1984 INSC 8417 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners, who had purchased lands originally granted by the State of Karnataka to members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, challenged the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, alleging that sections 4 and 5 violated Articles 19(1)(f), 31, 3

M.C. MEHTA & ANR. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

1986 INSC 1917 February 1986Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a public‑interest writ petition filed by environmental activist M.C. Mehta on behalf of Delhi residents challenging two orders that prohibited Shriram Foods & Fertiliser Industries from operating its caustic‑chlorine plant in a densely populated area of Delhi. After a series of oleum‑gas leak

SHIV RATAN MAKLM S/O NANDLAL MAKLMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 25016 December 1985Dismissed

Shiv Ratan Makhlam was intercepted at the India‑Nepal border in November 1984 and two pieces of foreign‑marked gold were seized from his trousers. He was arrested, released on bail, and later, in April 1985, the Government issued a detention order under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention o

BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHAversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1983 INSC 20316 December 1983Disposed off

The petition, filed by a social welfare organisation, alleged that thousands of migrant workers in stone quarries and crushers in Faridabad were subjected to inhuman conditions, forced labour and bondage, violating their fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 23 of the Constitution. The Court treated the letter addre

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

M.M. GUPTA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & ORS.

1982 INSC 7315 October 1982Appeal(s) allowed

Four Sub‑Judges were recommended by the Jammu & Kashmir High Court for promotion to District Judges. The State Government, relying on a Cabinet sub‑Committee, appointed four other officers, ignoring the High Court’s recommendations and without communicating any counter‑proposals. The petitioners filed writ petitions ch

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX (LAW) BOARD OF REVENUEversusG. S. PAI & CO.

1979 INSC 20815 October 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether ornaments and other gold articles purchased by G.S. Pai & Co. for melting qualified as "bullion and specie" under Entry 56 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, and whether the GI pipes sold by the company fell within "water supply and sanitary fittings" under Entry 26A. The Cour

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX ETC.ETC.versusA. B. ISMAIL ETC. ETC.

1986 INSC 7415 April 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents purchased live goats and sheep, slaughtered them, and sold the resulting meat. The assessing officer levied purchase tax on the purchase of the animals under s.5‑A(1)(a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, treating the conversion into meat as manufacture of "other goods". The Sales‑Tax Appellate

SHEELA BARSEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1983 INSC 915 February 1983Disposed off

The Supreme Court treated a journalist’s letter alleging assault and torture of women prisoners in Bombay police lock‑ups as a writ petition under Article 32. After directing an independent social‑work researcher to verify the allegations, the Court found that legal aid to indigent prisoners is a constitutional imperat

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

UNION OF INDIAversusH.R. PATANKAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 14114 August 1984Dismissed

The first respondent, H.R. Patankar, was recruited to the IAS in 1955 and assigned the year 1956 as his year of allotment. Several officers promoted from the Gujarat State Civil Service (respondents 3‑9) were also assigned the same year of allotment but began officiating in senior posts earlier than Patankar. The Gover

MUNSHI RAMversusNARSI RAM & ANOTHER

1983 INSC 214 January 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Munshi Ram filed a suit for possession of land, invoking his pre-emption right against Narsi Ram and another, based on a certified copy of a sale deed that listed only those two respondents. During the trial, the original sale deed was read out, revealing a third vendee, Munni Devi, who had not been impleaded. The appe

SHEELA BARSE & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1986 INSC 17113 August 1986Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a writ petition filed by Sheela Barse and others under Article 32, examined the right to a speedy trial for child accused of offences punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years. Relying on the earlier Hussainara Khatoon decision, the Court affirmed that the right to speedy trial is imp

RAJINDER NATH ETC.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

1979 INSC 15013 August 1979Appeal(s) allowed

A Hindu undivided family transferred its business to a partnership firm, which debited construction costs to the accounts of the four co‑owners. The partnership firm appealed assessments that added concealed income, and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the firm was not the owner of the properties, deletin

KASAMBHAI ARDUL REHMANBHAI SHAIKHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

1980 INSC 2413 February 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The accused were charged under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for adulterating turmeric powder. After the prosecution presented some evidence, a plea‑bargaining arrangement was reached among the prosecution, the defence and the magistrate, leading the accused to

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

DR. BALBIR SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION, DELHI AND ORS.

1984 INSC 23512 December 1984Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined challenges by several property owners against assessments made by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The core issue was how to determine the rateable value of four categories of properties – self‑occupied, par

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

SMT. MASUMAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

1981 INSC 14112 August 1981Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the wife of Hasnain Mukhtar Hussain Lakdawala, who was detained under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA). The petitioner challenged the validity of the detention on the ground that the repr

RURAL LITIGATION AND ENTITLEMENT KENDRA DEHRADUN & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1985 INSC 4912 March 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard writ petitions filed by Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra challenging the continued operation of numerous limestone quarries in the Dehradun‑Mussoorie area, alleging environmental pollution and ecological damage. The Court examined reports of two expert bodies – the Bhargav Committee and a

KARAM PAL & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF LNDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 5112 March 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, Assistants under the Central Secretariat Service Rules, 1962, challenged the select lists for promotion to Section Officer (1978‑1980) and the common seniority list, alleging that the quota for direct recruitment had broken down, the rota system could not operate, and seniority should be based on lengt

H.V. PARDASANI, ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 5212 March 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, Section Officers of the Central Secretariat Service, challenged the combined seniority list and the method of fixing inter‑se seniority between directly recruited officers and promotees, alleging that Rules 12, 13(5) and Regulation 3(3) of the Fourth Schedule were ultra‑vio​les of Articles 14 and 16 of

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusA PARENT OF A STUDENT OF MEDICAL COLLEGE, SIMLA & ORS

1985 INSC 8511 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The guardian of a medical college student wrote to the Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh alleging widespread ragging and attached a letter from his son. The High Court treated the letters as a writ petition, ordered that the petitioner's identity be kept confidential, and directed the State Government to file an affida

CALCUTTA DOCK LABOUR BOARD AND ANR.versusSMT. SANDHYA MITRA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 2111 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Md. Safiur Rehman, a dock worker, died leaving a widow and son. The Calcutta Dock Labour Board sought attachment of the gratuity payable to Rehman under its scheme to satisfy a decree against the heirs. The Small Causes Court ordered attachment, overruling the Board’s objection that gratuity was exempt. The High Court

SANJEEV COKE MANUFACTURING COMPANYversusBHARAT COKING COAL LTD. AND ANOTHER

1982 INSC 9310 December 1982Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered writ petitions filed by Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing Co. and Sunil Kumar Ray challenging the inclusion of their coke‑oven plants in the Second Schedule of the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972 on the ground of arbitrary discrimination violating Article 14. The Court examined wheth

NATIONAL TEXTILE WORKERS' UNION ETC.versusP.R. RAMKRISHNAN AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 9410 December 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose when a group of shareholders filed a winding‑up petition against Ramakrishna Industries Ltd. and obtained an interim injunction that threatened the payment of wages and supplies to the company's employees. Three trade unions representing the workers applied to be impleaded as respondents, arguing that th

J. MOHAPATRA & CO AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER

1984 INSC 13610 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the selection of textbooks and general‑reading books for school and college libraries in Orissa, where the State formed committees that included authors whose books were under consideration. Publishers challenged the selections, alleging bias, lack of standing, and violation of natural‑justice princi

SUK DAS & ANR.versusUNION TERRITORY OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

1986 INSC 3110 March 1986Appeal(s) allowed

Suk Das and others were charged under IPC sections 506 and 34 for threatening a public servant. The appellant, being impoverished, could not afford a lawyer and was not informed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner that he was entitled to free legal aid at State expense. He was convicted and sentenced to two years' im

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

S.P. SAMPATH KUMAR ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1986 INSC 2599 December 1986Case Allowed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, particularly the exclusion of High Court jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 and the qualifications for appointing the Chairman, Vice‑Chairman and members of the Tribunal. The Court held that while Parliament may creat

"COMMON CAUSE" A REGISTERED SOCIETY AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA

1986 INSC 2629 December 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, including the society Common Cause, challenged provisions of the Central Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981, arguing that the rule fixing a 15‑year period after retirement before the commuted portion of pension is restored is arbitrary in view of increased life expectancy and that defe

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

OM PRAKASH RANA ETC. ETC.versusSWARUP SINGH TOMAR & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1986 INSC 1189 May 1986Dismissed

The case concerned a vacancy for the post of Principal of Veer Smarak Intermediate College. Om Prakash Rana, a principal of another college, sought to fill the vacancy by transfer under section 16‑G(2)(c) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, which allowed transfer of service. After the U.P. Secondary Education

KASTORI LAL LAKSHMI REDDYversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & ANOTHER

1980 INSC 1259 May 1980Dismissed

The State of Jammu & Kashmir, seeking to promote industrialisation, allocated 11.85 lakh resin‑tapping blazes in inaccessible forest areas to a private firm (the second respondent) for a ten‑year period, requiring the firm to set up a resin processing plant in the State. The petitioners challenged the order under Artic

EMPIRE JUTE CO. LID.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1980 INSC 1269 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Empire Jute Co., a member of the Indian Jute Mills Association, purchased loom‑hours from four other mills under a quinquennial working‑time agreement that limited weekly loom operation. The company claimed Rs 2,03,255 as a revenue expense deductible under section 10(2)(xv) of the Income‑Tax Act, arguing that the payme

KHAZAN CHAND ETC.versusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 289 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, registered dealers under the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962, filed quarterly returns but failed to pay the tax on time, leading the Assessing Authority to levy interest under section 8 of the Act. They challenged the constitutional validity of sections 8(1), 8(2) and 8(3) on grounds of v

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

SHYAM LAL SHARMA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

1985 INSC 2398 November 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, railway employees, were dismissed or removed for participating in a strike without any enquiry. They filed writ petitions, which were transferred to the Supreme Court and ultimately dismissed. The petitioners then filed review petitions alleging that they were denied a chance to argue the merits, that

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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALAversusPIARA SINGH

1980 INSC 1118 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Piara Singh, a gold smuggler, was caught crossing the India‑Pakistan border in 1958 and Rs 65,500 in currency notes used to purchase gold abroad were confiscated by customs. He claimed that the confiscated amount was a loss incurred in his smuggling business and sought a deduction under section 10(1) of the Income‑Tax

RAKESH SAXENAversusSTATE THROUGH C.B.I.

1986 INSC 2287 November 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court entertained a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 filed by Rakesh Saxena, a low‑ranking trader in the Foreign Exchange Division of a bank, against charges filed by the CBI. The Court noted that the alleged offences were said to have occurred more than six years earlier and that the trial would be

SHIV CHAND AMOLAK CHANDversusREGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY & ANR.

1983 INSC 1497 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a partnership holding a stage‑carriage permit, sought to extend their route after a portion had been deleted by a nationalisation scheme and a subsequent state notification allowing short district‑headquarter routes. The Regional Transport Authority (RTA) rejected the extension, holding that the applica

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusBOMBAY TYRE INTERNATIONAL LTD. ETC. ETC.

1983 INSC 1487 October 1983Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the interpretation of Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, both before and after its amendment by the Central Excises and Salt (Amendment) Act, 1973, to determine how the "value" of an excisable article should be computed for excise duty. The Court held that the value is not l

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

BHAGWANT SINGHversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI

1983 INSC 626 May 1983Disposed off

Bhagwant Singh, a senior Indian Revenue Service officer, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that his daughter Gurinder Kaur was murdered in a dowry‑related dispute and that the Delhi police investigation was irregular, delayed and failed to collect crucial evidence. The Supreme Court ex

NIDAMARTI MAHESHKUMARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1986 INSC 656 April 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged the Maharashtra Government's Rule B(2), which restricted MBBS admissions to students who had studied within the jurisdiction of a particular university, arguing it violated Article 14 of the Constitution. The High Court had upheld the rule, relying on a deferred Supreme Court order concerning t

LAKSHMI KANT PANDEYversusUNION OF INDIA

1984 INSC 266 February 1984Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed by advocate Laxmi Kant Pandey, seeking to restrain private agencies from sending Indian children abroad for adoption and to direct the Union, the Indian Council of Social Welfare and the Indian Council of Child Welfare to fulfill their duties. Relying

COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX, BOMBAY ETC.versusSMT. KUSUMBEN D. MAHADEVIA ETC.

1979 INSC 2605 December 1979Dismissed

The assessees, a private limited investment company, claimed that the value of their shares should be determined by the profit‑earning method prepared by chartered accountants, while the Gift Tax and Wealth Tax officers used the break‑up method, resulting in a higher tax liability. The Tribunal accepted the profit‑earn

RAMESHWAR LAL SANWARMALversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ASSAM

1979 INSC 2615 December 1979Dismissed

The Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) beneficially owned shares in a private limited company, though the shares were registered in the name of its Karta. The company advanced loans to three business concerns owned by the HUF, and the Income‑Tax Officer treated those loans as "deemed dividend" under section 2(6A)(e) of the I

SHEELA BARSE & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1986 INSC 1575 August 1986Directions issued

The petitioner filed a writ under Article 32 seeking release of children under 16 detained in jails, full information on child inmates, and directions for legal aid and inspection of juvenile facilities. The Supreme Court ordered each District Judge, through the High Court, to inspect jails, report on child prisoners,

M. RAMNARAIN PRIVATE LTD. AND ANR.versusSTATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.

1983 INSC 585 May 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The State Trading Corporation sued M. Ramnarain Private Ltd. for a sum of over Rs. 40 lakhs. The trial judge granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff and allowed the payment of the decretal amount in instalments. The defendant filed an appeal (No. 36/1981) only against the instalment order, withdrew it the next day,

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusSUDHIR DEY AND ANR.

1984 INSC 2274 December 1984Dismissed

The State of West Bengal filed a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 challenging a Calcutta High Court order that granted bail to the accused Sudhir Dey and others and appointed the Deputy Inspector General of the CBI as a Special Officer to investigate murder allegations. The Supreme Court noted that the petition

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. ETC.versusSAMPAT LAL & ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 2284 December 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Two young boys were found dead under mysterious circumstances in Barrackpore, West Bengal, prompting letters to the Calcutta High Court alleging police negligence and demanding an independent investigation by the CBI. The High Court, without giving notice to the State, issued a rule directing the Deputy Inspector Gener

KHORSHED SHAPOOR CHENAI ETC.versusASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY

1979 INSC 2564 December 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two appeals challenging notices issued by the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty under sections 59(a) and 61 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, which sought to reopen and rectify estate duty assessments of lands acquired by the government. The Court held that the right to receive compensation for

K.P. VARGHESEversusTHE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, ERNAKULAM, AND ANOTHER

1981 INSC 1604 September 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, K.P. Varghese, sold a house to his daughter‑in‑law and five children for the same price he had paid for it (Rs 16,500) and reported no capital gain for the 1966‑67 assessment year. The Income‑Tax Officer later issued a notice under section 148 and reassessed the assessee, fixing the fair market value at

LAXMI KANT PANDEYversusUNION OF INDIA

1986 INSC 2543 December 1986Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained several criminal miscellaneous petitions filed under Article 32 seeking clarification of the procedural safeguards it had earlier laid down for the adoption of Indian children by foreign and Indian parents. It directed that reasonable remuneration, ranging from Rs. 450 to Rs. 500 (and up t

AHURA CHEMICAL PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA

1981 INSC 1593 September 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Ahura Chemical Products Pvt. Ltd. manufactured emulsifiers and wetting agents and bought organic surface active agents from Industrial General Products Pvt. Ltd., a supplier exempt from excise duty because it manufactured without power. Under a 1968 Government Notification, such emulsifiers are exempt from excise duty

BRIJ MOHANversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

1979 INSC 1423 August 1979Reference answered

Brij Mohan, a partner in two firms, filed his 1964-65 income tax return late in April 1968, disclosing income from one firm but concealing income from the other. The Income Tax Officer, upon discovery, imposed a penalty under Section 271(1)(c)(iii) as amended by the Finance Act 1968, which allowed a penalty up to twice

APOORVA SHANTILAL SHAHversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GUJARAT-I, AHMEDABAD

1983 INSC 203 March 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Hindu undivided family (HUF) consisting of Apoorva Shantilal Shah, his wife and two minor sons, sought recognition of two partial partitions of shares in Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. under Section 171 of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961. The Income‑Tax Officer refused, and the matter progressed through the appella

GAYA PARSHAD DIKSHITversusDR. NIRMAL CHANDER & ANR.

1984 INSC 23 January 1984Dismissed

The appellant, Gaya Parshad Oikshit, continued to occupy certain rooms after his licence to occupy the premises was terminated by the licensor, Dr. Nirmal Chander. The licensor filed a suit for recovery of possession, and the appellant claimed title by adverse possession under Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Th

ASSOCIATED CEMENT CO. LTD.versusCOMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KOTA & ORS.

1981 INSC 1572 September 1981Case Partly allowed

Associated Cement Co. Ltd., a cement manufacturer, filed its sales‑tax returns for 1973‑74 under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act without including freight charges, believing they were not taxable. After the Supreme Court in Hindustan Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan held that freight for

MRS. ARUNA BASU MULLICKversusMRS. DOROTHEA MITRA

1983 INSC 862 August 1983Dismissed

Mrs. Dorothea Mitra obtained a decree of divorce in 1962 granting her permanent alimony of Rs.300 per month until remarriage, under Section 37 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. The husband, Prafulla Kumar Mitra, died in 1965 without providing for the decree in his will, and the executrix failed to continue payments af

TULSIPUR SUGAR CO. LTD. ETC.versusSECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF U.P. & ORS.

1986 INSC 1032 May 1986Dismissed

The Uttar Pradesh Government, under Section 14(1)(a) of the U.P. Sugarcane (Purchase Tax) Act, 1961, granted a remission of purchase tax of Re. 0.51 per quintal to twenty sugar factories in the eastern zone that purchased sugarcane yielding low recovery, while denying the same relief to other similarly situated factori

LABOURERS WORKING ON SALAL HYDRO-PROJECTversusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 182 March 1983Appeal(s) allowed

A news report prompted the People's Union for Democratic Rights to file a writ petition alleging that migrant labourers on the Salal Hydro‑Electric Project were denied statutory benefits. The Supreme Court examined reports of the Labour Commissioner, which revealed that the project, executed by the National Hydro Elect

RAJENDRA PRASAD MATHUR ETC. ETCversusKARNATAKA UNIVERSITY & ANR.

1986 INSC 1011 May 1986Dismissed

The Karnataka University prescribed, under emergency powers, that admission to its engineering courses required passing the two‑year Pre‑University Examination of the Bangalore board or an equivalent exam recognised by the university. The appellants, who had either passed the 11‑year Higher Secondary Examination of Raj

DR. DINESH KUMAR & ORS.versusMOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE ALLAHABAD & ORS.

1985 INSC 1151 May 1985Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, who had completed their MBBS and house‑job before the Supreme Court’s June 22, 1984 judgment in Dr. Pradeep Jain’s case, were denied admission to two‑year postgraduate medical courses for 1985‑86 because the college applied the new 50% institutional‑preference rule instead of the earlier 75% rule. They

STATE OF BIHARversusDR. YOGENDRA SINGH COL. (RETD.) AND OTHER

1982 INSC 271 March 1982Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Yogendra Singh, a Professor of Surgery at Magadh Medical College, was appointed under university regulations that fixed the retirement age at 62. After the Bihar Government took over the college under the Bihar Private Medical Colleges (Taking Over) Act, 1978, a Screening Committee recommended retiring teachers ove

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