question stringclasses 1
value | context stringlengths 51 9.23k | answer stringlengths 152 158k |
|---|---|---|
What is the summary of this judgment? | IVIL Appeal No.768 (NT) of 1977 etc. From the judgment Order dated 9.10.1975 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in M.C.C. No.144 of 1966. V.A. Bobde, B.R.Aggarwala and U.A.Rana for the Appellant. S.V.Deshpande and S.K.Agnihotri for the Respondents. | The appellant, a manufacturer of cement, entered into an agreement with the Cement Manufacturing Company of India Limited, for sale of cement. Under the agreement, the appellant was to sell its cement only through the marketing company, and certain sums would be paid for the cement supplied by the marketing company, wh... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATH MISHRA, CJ. These are appeals by special leave 252 and are directed against the separate decisions of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in references under the Madhya Pradesh Sales Tax Act. Civil Appeal No.768/77 relates to the assessment period 1951 52, Civil Appeal 539... | The appellant, a manufacturer of cement, entered into an agreement with the Cement Manufacturing Company of India Limited, for sale of cement. Under the agreement, the appellant was to sell its cement only through the marketing company, and certain sums would be paid for the cement supplied by the marketing company, wh... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Marketing Company had the authority to sell cement at such price or prices and upon such terms as it might in its sole discretion consider appropriate. For the three periods referred to above the appellant had supplied cement manufactured by it to the Marketing Company and maintained at the assessment stage for the... | The appellant, a manufacturer of cement, entered into an agreement with the Cement Manufacturing Company of India Limited, for sale of cement. Under the agreement, the appellant was to sell its cement only through the marketing company, and certain sums would be paid for the cement supplied by the marketing company, wh... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It is seen that the Cement Marketing Company is an independent organisation and is carrying on business as an independent entity. It is also seen that what has actually been taxed are the sales effected by the appellant to the Cement Marketing Company 253 of India and not the sales made to the parties which obtained an... | The appellant, a manufacturer of cement, entered into an agreement with the Cement Manufacturing Company of India Limited, for sale of cement. Under the agreement, the appellant was to sell its cement only through the marketing company, and certain sums would be paid for the cement supplied by the marketing company, wh... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | This Court in Rohtas Industries case on a detailed analysis of the terms of the contract came to hold that there was a sale between the manufacturer and the Marketing Company. It is not in dispute that the agreement between the appellant and the Marketing Company in this case has the same terms as this Court considered... | The appellant, a manufacturer of cement, entered into an agreement with the Cement Manufacturing Company of India Limited, for sale of cement. Under the agreement, the appellant was to sell its cement only through the marketing company, and certain sums would be paid for the cement supplied by the marketing company, wh... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | There was no privity between the manufacturer and the ultimate consumer who was said to have been located outside the State of Madhya Pradesh. The question for consideration is whether the sale that look place between the manufacturer and the Marketing Company can be taken to be covered by the Explanation. The Explanat... | The appellant, a manufacturer of cement, entered into an agreement with the Cement Manufacturing Company of India Limited, for sale of cement. Under the agreement, the appellant was to sell its cement only through the marketing company, and certain sums would be paid for the cement supplied by the marketing company, wh... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The concept of inter State sale as brought in by the Sixth Amendment or in the subsequent statute known as the Central Sales Tax Act was not in existence for the relevant period now under consideration. The finding recorded by the authorities is that the delivery of the cement was not the direct result of such sale or ... | The appellant, a manufacturer of cement, entered into an agreement with the Cement Manufacturing Company of India Limited, for sale of cement. Under the agreement, the appellant was to sell its cement only through the marketing company, and certain sums would be paid for the cement supplied by the marketing company, wh... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The ratio of Mohd. Serajuddin vs State of Orissa, is also against the appellant 's stand. We accordingly dismiss the appeals and uphold the decisions of the High Court. There would be no order for costs. V.P.R. Appeals dismissed. | The appellant, a manufacturer of cement, entered into an agreement with the Cement Manufacturing Company of India Limited, for sale of cement. Under the agreement, the appellant was to sell its cement only through the marketing company, and certain sums would be paid for the cement supplied by the marketing company, wh... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Appeal No. 36 of 1967. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated August 25, 1966 of the Punjab High Court, Circuit Bench at Delhi in Letters Patent Appeal No. 36 D of 1966. Bishan Narain, R. Mahatingier and Ganpat Rai, for the appellant. R. H. Dhebar and section P. Nayar, for respondent Nos. | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 1 and 3. In 1943 he mortgaged the said property with possession in favour of one K. B. Bunyad Hussain but obtained a lease thereof at the same time from the mortgagee and continued to reside therein as tenant. In November 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan a whereupon the Custodian of Evacuee Property under the (her... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 1,45,735/ was ultimately held to be due as the mortgage debt under the said mortgage. The appellant claimed that he was entitled to obtain vacant possession of the said property against payment by him of the mortgage debt. The claim was rejected on the ground that there was no agreement between the appellant and the Cu... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | On this finding the Appellate Officer dismissed the appellant 's application as he had neither paid the mortgage money nor put in the verified claims as suggested in the said correspondence and confirmed the order of the Competent Officer under which the property had been ordered to be sold in the absence of any agreem... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | However, it is conceded by counsel for respondents 1 and 3 that the appellant has since then paid the entire mortgage debt and the Competent Officer has under section 10 of the Separation Act accepted that amount. Two questions on these facts, therefore, arise, for deter mination; (1) whether the order for sale passed ... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Under section 60 of that Act, the mortgagor has a right at any time after the principal amount has become due to require the mortgagee on payment or tender of the mortgage debt (a) to deliver to him the mortgage deed and all other documents relating to the mortgaged property which are in the mortgagee 's possession or ... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | When the mortgagor has tendered or deposited in court the. mortgage debt together with interest thereon and has done all that is to be done by him to enable the mortgagee to take such amount out of court, and a notice, as aforesaid, has been served on the mortgagee under section 83 interest ceases to run. If the mortga... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It follows that a mortgagee is not permitted to deal with the property in such a way that upon discharge of the debt the property cannot be restored. [see Fisher. & Lightwood 's Law of Mortgage (8th ed.) p. 482]. Is the position of a mortgagor any the different than under the by reason of the evacuee property legislati... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Upon the mortgagee being declared an evacuee and his interest as such mortgagee in the premises in question evacuee property, his interest in the mortgaged property vested under section 8 of the Administration Act in the Custodian from the date of the notice issued under section 7 of the Act. Under section 8 (4) any pe... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It is also conceded that the Custodian has refused, notwithstanding demands made by the appellant, to evict these persons from the property and hand over vacant possession to the appellant even on the appellant tendering the mortgage amount. This was presumably done by reason of the fact that though section 12 empowers... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Sections 4 and 5 of the Act provide for the appointment of Competent Officers and their jurisdiction. Sec. 7 provides for submission of claims by a person claiming interest in 857 a composite property. (e) of sub section 2 requires that where a claim is made by a mortgagor the total amount due on the mortgage debt and ... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Sub section 2 of section 8, however, provides that where the Custodian has determined that the property in question or any interest therein is evacuee property, such determination is binding on the competent officer. The proviso to that sub section lays down that nothing contained in sub section 2 shall debar the compe... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | (b), he is also empowered in such a case to redeem the mortgaged property. The argument was that where the mortgage amount is tendered by the mortgagor and the competent officer accepts it in satis 858 faction of the debt due under the mortgage, the mortgage debt is satisfied, interest thereon ceases to run and the mor... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | (b) (i), i.e, to pay to the Custodian the mortgage debt and redeem the mortgaged property. It was said that that being the position under section 10, the appellant was entitled to tender the mort. gage amount in satisfaction of the debt due under the mortgage on condition that the mortgage should be redeemed and posses... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It must have been aware of (i) that the Administration Act is, as aforesaid, a self contained code, (ii) that the Custodian appointed thereunder is not an authority subject to the power or control of the Competent Officer, and (iii) that the Administration Act, by sections 10 and 12 thereof, confers several powers on t... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It would seem that the two Acts have different objects and schemes and the authorities established under them are independent of each other. The powers conferred 859 on the Competent Officer had, therefore, to be so provided that they could be exercised in harmony and consistently with the pro ' visions of the Administ... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | (b) of that rule provides that in the case of a claim by a mortgagor or a mortgagee (1) where both the Custodian and claimant agree, the Competent Officer can exercise the powers. conferred on him under sub cl. (i) or sub cl. (iii) of cl. (b) of section 10 of the Act and (ii) where there is no such agreement, he can se... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It follows that in the absence of such agreement the mortgagor claimant cannot demand from the Competent Officer that the latter should accept the mortgage amount tendered by him and direct simultaneous delivery of possession of the mortgaged property. The power to redeem the mortgaged property being subject to rule II... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | If the Custodian is satisfied on hearing the concerned lessee that he is not liable to eviction under a rent control Act in force in the State where the property is situate or has not contravened any of the provisions of the lease, he cannot cancel the lease nor can he evict the lessee except only as provided by cl. (5... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The only thing which, the Competent Officer could do in the circumstances was to accept the mortgage amount whereupon interest would cease to run. It is not in dispute that the appellant, insisting as he was 861 all throughout upon being given vacant and not merely symbolical possession, did not actually tender or make... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | [of in this connection the position of an auction purchaser as decided in Ek Nawas Khan vs The Competent Officer(1)]. But it is conceded that since the passing of the said order the appellant has, paid up the full mortgage amount and the Competent Officer has, as he was bound to do under section 10, proviso, accepted t... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | That is quite clear. But the order of sale passed by him and confirmed by the Appellate Officer also cannot secondly, because he can order sale only for satisfaction of the mortgage debt and for distribution of the sale proceeds thereof ' between the mortgagor and the mortgagee. There being now no question of the satis... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 1960 All. 862 appear to be harsh and unfair as the appellant would be driven to file proceedings for eviction of tenants and allottees now in possession of the property. (see The All India Film Corporation Ltd. vs Raja Gyan Nath) (1). In view of the payment of the mortgage amount by the appellant and the acceptance of ... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The order for costs of the appeal would ordinarily follow the result, but in view of the fact that the Competent Officer was entitled to pass the order of sale in the circumstances then prevailing it is fair and equitable, though his order is set aside, that the parties should bear their own costs. V.P.S Appeal allowed... | The appellant executed a usufructuary mortgage of his house and continued to reside in it as a tenant under a lease obtained from the mortgagee. In 1949, the mortgagee left for Pakistan. He was declared an evacuee and his mortgagee interest in the mortgaged property vested in the Custodian under section 8 of the. Under... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | ivil Appeal No. 2072 of 1990. From the Judgment and Order dated 13.5. 1986 of the Calcutta High Court in Suit No. 2479 of 1967. M.K. | The appellant had filed a suit in the High Court of Calcutta for a declaration that the properties set out in the schedule belonged to a joint family and that the trust created by the father of the plaintiff/appellant in respect of the said properties was void. Pending the suit, a Receiv er was appointed by Justice A.N... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Banerjee, Subrat Rai Choudhary, Gopal Subramanium, N.P. Aggarwala, Anil Aggarwala, P.C. Sharma, L.P. Aggarwala, Ms. Indira Banerjee, R.N. Jhunjhunwala, Praveen Kumar, C.S. Vaidyanathan, P.R. Seetharaman, D.N. | The appellant had filed a suit in the High Court of Calcutta for a declaration that the properties set out in the schedule belonged to a joint family and that the trust created by the father of the plaintiff/appellant in respect of the said properties was void. Pending the suit, a Receiv er was appointed by Justice A.N... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Mukherjee, Raj Kumr Gupta and P.C. Kapur for the appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. Leave granted. This appeal is directed against the order of the Divi sion Bench of the High Court of Calcutta. The appellant was transposed as the plaintiff in the Original Side suit N... | The appellant had filed a suit in the High Court of Calcutta for a declaration that the properties set out in the schedule belonged to a joint family and that the trust created by the father of the plaintiff/appellant in respect of the said properties was void. Pending the suit, a Receiv er was appointed by Justice A.N... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 2479/67 in the High Court of Calcutta. The suit was filed for a declaration that the various properties set out in the Schedule belonged and still belong to the joint family consisting of the members mentioned in the plaint. Pending the suit an application was filed for appointment of a receiver for the various propert... | The appellant had filed a suit in the High Court of Calcutta for a declaration that the properties set out in the schedule belonged to a joint family and that the trust created by the father of the plaintiff/appellant in respect of the said properties was void. Pending the suit, a Receiv er was appointed by Justice A.N... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 38, New Road, Alipore, building with open space was one of the properties belonging to the trust. Grindlays Bank Limited ( 'Grindlays ' for short), respondent No. 1 herein was the original tenant and they were occupying four flats and they surrendered a portion of the tenancy namely two flats i.e. Flats Nos. 1 and 2 wh... | The appellant had filed a suit in the High Court of Calcutta for a declaration that the properties set out in the schedule belonged to a joint family and that the trust created by the father of the plaintiff/appellant in respect of the said properties was void. Pending the suit, a Receiv er was appointed by Justice A.N... |
End of preview. Expand in Data Studio
No dataset card yet
- Downloads last month
- 2