question stringclasses 1
value | context stringlengths 51 9.23k | answer stringlengths 152 158k |
|---|---|---|
What is the summary of this judgment? | The question of secondary packing was examined by this Court in Bombay Tyres International 's case (supra). There, this Court observed that for the purpose of determining the 'value ', broadly speaking both old section 4(a) and the new section 4(1)(a)speak of the price for sale in the course of whole sale trade of an a... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Where the sale in the course of whole sale trade is effected by the assessee through its sales organisation at a place or places outside the factory gate, the expenses incurred by the assessee upto the date of delivery under the aforesaid heads cannot, on the same grounds, be deducted. This Court further observed that ... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The large cartons may be packed into even larger cartons for facilitating the easier transport of the goods by the wholesale dealer. The question with which this Court was concerned in that case was: is all the packing, no matter to what degree, in which the wholesale dealer takes delivery of the goods to be considered... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It was further held therein that if any special secondary packing is provided by the assessee at the instance of a wholesale buyer which is not generally provided as a normal feature of the wholesale trade, the cost of the such packing shall be deducted from the wholesale cash price. Therefore, it is clear by virtue of... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | There, Chief Justice Bhagwati observed that whenever a question arises whether the cost of any particular kind of secondary packing is liable to be included in the value of the arti cle, ' the question to be asked is does the packed condition in which the article is generally sold in the wholesale market at the factory... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Explanation to section 4(4)(d)(i) of the Act provides an exclusive definition of the term "packing" and it includes not only outer packing but also what may be called inner packing. The question that the Chief Justice posed was not for what purpose a particu lar kind of packing was done. The test was whether a part... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | And answering that question, Pathak, J. held it is not. It is true that there is a divergence between the views of Bhagwati C J, Pathak, J and Sen, J. But in my opinion, there is a unanimi ty in the test that is to be applied, that is to say, that much of the cost would be included only which is necessary for putting t... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | But what is subsequent to that, that is to say, any cost merely facilitating transport or merely ensuring security in transit are costs which are post manufacture, i.e. after articles have become goods as a result of manufacture and are capable of becoming manufac tured and thereafter dealt with. This, in my opinion, i... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Therefore, in all cases, according to that decision, the question must be examined whether packing, and if so, what packing is necessary to make the article marketable as such or could these goods be sold without the containers, drums or packing? This Court in that case took into account the fact that 90% of the goods ... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Chief Justice Bhagwati held in the said case that the fibre board containers in which the cigarettes were packed fell within the definition of 'packing ' in the Explanation to section 4(4)(d)(i) and if these formed part of the packing in which the goods were packed when delivered at the time of removal, then such cost ... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | But in Godfrey Philips ' case (supra), the corrugated fibre board containers were employed for the purpose of avoiding damage or injury during transit. On the other hand, in this case, it was found that there was no damage or injury to the tins or plastic containers employed as a primary packing even if the goods are t... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It may be mentioned in this connection that our atten tion was drawn to the unanimous order of three Judge Bench presided over by the Chief Justice Bhagwati of this Court in Civil Appeals Nos. 642 45 of 1982 in Geep Industrial Syndi cate Ltd. vs The Union of India & Ors. There, the question that arose for determination... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The question was whether the wooden boxes in which the cardboard cartons were placed at the time of delivery at the factory gate was to be includible in the value. There was some dispute between the parties whether the cardboard cartons were packed in wooden boxes in all cases. It was stated that when they were deliver... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Tribunal in the instant case observed as under: "We observe that in the facts of the present case, the rationale of the judgment of the Hon 'ble Supreme Court above is squarely ap plicable. We hold following with respect to the ratio of the decision above that the cost of the outer or bigger carton in which the sma... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Packing, which is primarily done or mainly done for protecting the goods, and not for making the goods marketable should not be included. In the instant case, therefore, could the powder be sold in smaller cartons at the wholesale market? The fact that these were usually sold in the wholesale market would be a good poi... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | If the above be the true test, then the judgment and the order of the Tribunal must be set aside and the appeal must be allowed and the matter remanded back to the Tribunal to determine afresh this question from the stand point indicated above. I accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the judgment and order of the Tri... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 123 and Geep, (C.A. Nos. 642 45 of 1982, I should like to add a few words. section 4(4)(d)(i) of the Act lays down that where goods are delivered at the factory gate in a packed condition, the cost of the packing should be included in the assessable value. The clause makes no distinction between primary packing and sec... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Court observed that "the degree of secondary packing which is necessary for putting the excisable article in the condition in which it is generally sold in the wholesale market at the factory gate, is the degree of packing whose cost can be included in the value of the article for the purpose of the excise levy. "I... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Indeed, this was the test applied by one of us (Muk harji, J.) in Hindustan Polymers for holding that the cost of drums for packing fusel oil was not includible in the assessable value because the goods viz. fusel oil was gener ally sold in the wholesale market in the raw state, without any packing whatever, leaving it... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | But this was not the view taken by this Court. There is, therefore, much to be said for the view that, in judging the condition of packing whose cost is to be included in the 494 assessable value, one should go by the conduct of the par ties and the nature of the packing in which the goods gener ally are not, can be pl... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | This would render even the cost of the first outer packing of cardboard containers irrelevant in the determination of the assessable value. That was not the contention even of the respondents and indeed, if carried to its logical conclusion, would render the cost of all pack ing, other than primary packing, excludible ... | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | I would, therefore, agree that the matter should be remanded to be reconsidered in the light of our observations. Y. Lal Appeals allowed. | The Respondent assessee used to manufacture talcum powder and face powder and were clearing the same on payment of excise duty. The assessee claimed deduction of cost of packing for transportation in respect of small packings of powder ranging from 0.27 paise to 0.76 paise per dozen packings and the same was first appr... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Civil Appeal No. 322 of 1970. From the Judgment and Decree dated 25 3 1969 of the Madras High Court in Appeal No. 1195 of 1970. U.R. Lalit, P.H. | If the certificate granted by the Court under sub clauses (a) and (c) of clause (1) of Article 133 of the Constitution, as it then stood, did not conform to legal requirements in as much as it did not specify the substantial question of law which, according to High Court, required determination and no reasons in respec... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Parekh and Miss Manik Tarkunde for the Appellant. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KOSHAL J. A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. Rangam to the effect that the certificate granted by the court under sub clauses (a) and (c) of clause (1) of Article 133 of the Constitution of India, as it then stood, ... | If the certificate granted by the Court under sub clauses (a) and (c) of clause (1) of Article 133 of the Constitution, as it then stood, did not conform to legal requirements in as much as it did not specify the substantial question of law which, according to High Court, required determination and no reasons in respec... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | We have gone through the impugned judgment and find that no such question is involved at all. We, therefore, refuse special leave, revoke the certificate granted by the High Court and dismiss the appeal but with no order as to costs. P.B.R. Appeal dismissed. | If the certificate granted by the Court under sub clauses (a) and (c) of clause (1) of Article 133 of the Constitution, as it then stood, did not conform to legal requirements in as much as it did not specify the substantial question of law which, according to High Court, required determination and no reasons in respec... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Civil, Appeal No. 2272 of 1966, Appeal from the judgment and order dated January 6, 1966 of Calcutta High Court in Income tax Reference No. 211 of 1961. section Mitra, A. section Nambiar, R. N. Sachthey and B. D. Sharma, for the appellant. M. C. Chagla and P. K. Chatterjee, for the respondents 309 The Judgment of the C... | The assessee was a partner in a firm. On the last day of the accounting year of the firm, namely, 1st July 1954 he retired from the firm and gifted 'to each of his four sons Rs. 75,000. The firm was reconstituted and the first son, who was a major, became a partner in the firm. The other sons who were minors, became en... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The assessee at whose instance those question were referred did not press for an answer in respect of question No. 1. Therefore that question was not dealt with by the High Court. Hence we need not go into that question. The High Court answered the second question in favour of the assessee. The facts necessary for the ... | The assessee was a partner in a firm. On the last day of the accounting year of the firm, namely, 1st July 1954 he retired from the firm and gifted 'to each of his four sons Rs. 75,000. The firm was reconstituted and the first son, who was a major, became a partner in the firm. The other sons who were minors, became en... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Ajitmal Kanhaiyalal having annas share therein. He continued to be a partner of that firm till July 1, 1954 which was the last date of the accounting year of the firm, relevant for the, assessment year 1955 56. On July 1, 1954, the assessee retired from the firm. Thereafter he gifted to each of his four sons Rs., 75,00... | The assessee was a partner in a firm. On the last day of the accounting year of the firm, namely, 1st July 1954 he retired from the firm and gifted 'to each of his four sons Rs. 75,000. The firm was reconstituted and the first son, who was a major, became a partner in the firm. The other sons who were minors, became en... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The major son of the assessee became a partner of the reconstituted firm and his minor sons were admitted to the benefits of that partnership in the reconstituted firm. The major son had 2 annas share. His three minor brothers were admitted to the benefits of the partnership, each one of them having 2 annas share. In t... | The assessee was a partner in a firm. On the last day of the accounting year of the firm, namely, 1st July 1954 he retired from the firm and gifted 'to each of his four sons Rs. 75,000. The firm was reconstituted and the first son, who was a major, became a partner in the firm. The other sons who were minors, became en... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The assessee took up the matter in appeal to the Income tax Appellate 'Tribunal. The tribunal upheld the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. On the facts found by the tribunal, the High Court came to the conclusion that answer to question No. 2 should be in the negative and in favour of the assessee. The ... | The assessee was a partner in a firm. On the last day of the accounting year of the firm, namely, 1st July 1954 he retired from the firm and gifted 'to each of his four sons Rs. 75,000. The firm was reconstituted and the first son, who was a major, became a partner in the firm. The other sons who were minors, became en... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | But on an interpretation of section 16(3) (a) (iv) the High Court opined that the answer to the question must be in favour of the assessee. Section 16(3) (a) (iv) reads "In computing the total income of any individual for the purpose of assessment, there shall be included (a) so much of the income of a wife or minor ch... | The assessee was a partner in a firm. On the last day of the accounting year of the firm, namely, 1st July 1954 he retired from the firm and gifted 'to each of his four sons Rs. 75,000. The firm was reconstituted and the first son, who was a major, became a partner in the firm. The other sons who were minors, became en... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It may also be that the amount contributed by those minors as their share in the firm came from those amounts. But the question still remains whether it can be said that the income with which we are concerned in this case arises directly or indirectly from the assets transferred by the assessee to those minors. The con... | The assessee was a partner in a firm. On the last day of the accounting year of the firm, namely, 1st July 1954 he retired from the firm and gifted 'to each of his four sons Rs. 75,000. The firm was reconstituted and the first son, who was a major, became a partner in the firm. The other sons who were minors, became en... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | it cannot be said that that income arose directly or indirectly from the transfer of the assets referred to earlier. Section 16(3) of the Act created an artificial income. That section must receive strict construction as observed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat vs Keshavlal Lallubhai Patel(1). In o... | The assessee was a partner in a firm. On the last day of the accounting year of the firm, namely, 1st July 1954 he retired from the firm and gifted 'to each of his four sons Rs. 75,000. The firm was reconstituted and the first son, who was a major, became a partner in the firm. The other sons who were minors, became en... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Appeal No. 4 of 1950. Appeal from the High Court of Judicature of Calcutta (Sir Trevor Harries C.J. and Mukherjea J.) from a judgment and decree dated May 30, 1948, in Appeal No. 21 of 1947 confirming with modifications the decree of a single Judge of the same High Court (Ormond J.) | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | dated January 24, 1947, in suit No. 1031 of 1945. 108 842 N.C.Catterjee (Samarendra Nath Mukherje, with him) for the appellant. P.L. Banerjee (Upendra Chandra Mullick, with him) for the respondent. 1950. | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | December 1. The Judgment of the Court was deliv ered by DAS J. This is an appeal by the defendant in a suit for specific performance against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal (Sir Trevor Hatties C.J. and Mukherjea J.) dated May 30, 1948, dismissing his appeal and confirmi... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 374 Upper Chitpur Road in the town of Cal cutta (hereinafter referred to as the "said premises"). By an Indenture of lease made on April 27, 1931, the Maharaja as manager of the Cossimbazar Raj Wards Estate which was then under the management of the Court of Wards demised tim said premises to one Madan Gopal Daga for a... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 1,80,000 and upon terms and conditions contained in the correspondence to which reference will be made in greater detail hereafter. On February 21, 1945, the defendant wrote a letter to the lessor intimating that he had agreed to assign his interest in the lease to the plaintiff and re questing the lessor to give his c... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It was pointed out that under the terms of the lease the lessor could not refuse his consent to the transfer of the lease to a respectable or responsible person which the plaintiff undoubtedly was. It is not necessary to refer to the further correspondence that followed in which each 844 party maintained his own conten... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 59,213 11 0 for arrears of rent which was paid up. There is no dispute that the forfeiture of the lease for non payment of rent was waived and the lease was accordingly revived. Shortly after the settlement of the ejectment suit the defendant on August 6, 1945, applied to the lessor for his consent to the assignment of... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The defend ant appealed. After two days ' hearing, "in order to clear up the matter" the appeal Court "gave the plaintiff an opportu nity to examine the Maharaja as a witness in this case so that all relevant facts might be brought out and placed before the Court for the purpose of enabling it to come to a proper decis... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The defendant has now come up before us in appeal from this judgment and decree of the appeal Court. The first point urged by learned counsel appearing in support of this appeal is that, being subject to the consent of the lessor, the agreement was contingent on the defendant obtaining such consent and as the defendant... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | You shall have to obtain the necessary consent for the transfer of the lease in favour of myself or my nominees from the said Maharaja of Cossimbazar before the execution of the transfer of lease in my favour. ' ' The defendant replied to the plaintiff 's above letter on January 28, 1945. By this reply the defendant ex... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It is quite clear that no agreement was concluded by these two letters for the defendant 's letter was not an unconditional acceptance of the plaintiff 's offer but amounted in law to only a counter offer. By clause 3 the defendant offered to transfer the lease to the plaintiff as from February 1, 1945, so as to entitl... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The plaintiff, however, does not appear to have accepted the defendant 's counter offer but on January 29, 1945, through his solicitors made a fresh offer to purchase the defendant 's leasehold interest at Rs. 1,80,000 on the following terms: 847 "(a) That the earnest money will be Rs. 5,000 (Rupees five thousand) inst... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | (c) That your client will complete the conveyance within a month after the receipt by us of all the original title deeds with you. (d) That the transfer of the property in favour of our client will take effect on and from the 1st February, 1945, irrespective of the date of the conveyance, he being enti tled to all the ... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | This agreement was not, for its coming into being, contingent or conditional on the obtaining of the lessor 's consent. The obligation to obtain the lessor 's consent was cast upon the defendant as a term of the agreement. In our judgment the Court below was right in holding that the agreement 848 itself was not contin... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In other words, those words have the effect of relieving the lessee from the burden of this covenant if the lessor withholds his consent unreasonably in case of proposed assignment to a respectable or responsible person. In this view of the matter, the plaintiff contended that he being a respectable and responsible per... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The next objection of the appellant was that this point should not have been allowed to be raised and no evidence should have been permitted to be adduced on this point in the absence of the lessor as a party to the suit. We do not think that there is any force in this objection. The Court had to decide whether it was ... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The third objection of the appellant is that the appeal Court should not have allowed the plaintiff to adduce fur ther evidence. It will be recalled that the appeal Court directed the evidence of the Maharaja of Cossimbazar to be taken during the hearing of the appeal. The judgment of the appeal Court clearly indicates... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It will be recalled that that was a term which was introduced by the plaintiff in his offer that eventually ripened into an agreement. The term was not expressed in a manner indicating that it was inserted in the agreement for the protection of the defendant. In other words, the objection that the consent of the lessor... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | If the assignment of the lease by the defendant to the plaintiff without the lessor 's consent amounted to a breach of covenant, the lessor could forfeit the lease and sue for possession. Such a course would affect only the plaintiff but not the defendant, for he had already parted with the lease for valuable considera... | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In the circumstances, we are satisfied that both the trial Court and the appeal Court exercised their discre tion properly and no ground has been made out for our inter fering with the judgment of the High Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The appellant to pay the costs of this appeal. Appeal dismissed. | The defendant had obtained certain premises on lease under a deed which contained a covenant by the lessee "not to assign the demised premises or any part thereof without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor, such consent, however, not to be unreasonably withheld in the ease of respectable or responsible p... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Appeal No. 1353 of 1975. (Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 1 11 1974 of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No. 493 of 1966 from original Decree.) F.S. Nariman, B.R. | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Zaiawala, B.S. Bisaria, J.B. Dadac hanji, O.C. Mathut, K.J. John and Shri Narain, for the appellants. P.H. Parekh and Miss Manju Jetely, for the respondent. | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAILASAM, J. This appeal by special leave is preferred by the Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay against the judgment of the Bench of the Bombay High Court in first appeal confirming the decree passed by the City Civil Court and dismissing the appeal with costs. The respo... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The first 2 consignments arrived on February 16, 1957. Suffice it to say that the clearance of the two consignments as well as the third consignment 345 was considerably delayed and the Port Trust claimed demur rage for the period from March 25, 1957. The respondents disputed the right of the Port Trust to charge any d... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Due to protracted correspondence between the parties the goods were not cleared and ultimately the suit was filed by the respondents for recovery of a sum of Rs. 24,950 and interest thereon from the Port Trust being the aggregate loss sustained by them. The appellants denied that liabili ty and pleaded that the Port Tr... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The appellants preferred an appeal to a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court which dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decree passed by the City Civil Court. When the appeal was pending before the High Court the appellants deposited the decretal amount in court which was withdrawn by the respondents. Mr. Nariman,... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The appellants, the Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay, is a statutory body constituted by the Bombay Port Trust Act, Act 6 of 1879, and is a body corporate. Chapter VI of the Act relates to Revenue and Expenditure and pro vides for levy of rates. Section 346 43 empowers the Board to frame a scale of tolls, dues, ... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It is admitted that the Board framed a scale of rights for demurrage of goods and the scale so framed by the Board was submitted to the Central Government and was sanc tioned by the Central Government and published by the Bombay Government in the Gazette as required. The result is that under section 43B(1 ) the scales ... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | letter dated 7th September, 1952 addressed by the Government of India to the Port Trust which is typed at page 350 of the Supplement Paper Book No. 2. In the D.O. letter the Government expressed its view that it seems unreasonable to charge an importer any demurrage once it is accepted that clearance was delayed on acc... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Board considered this letter and after taking into consideration the several circumstances, suggested that demurrage may be levied on a graded scale. The Government of India was informed of the Resolution of the Board and no further action was taken by the Government. The D.O. letter addressed by the Government of ... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Port Trust considered the proposal and made its report. We are unable to accept the plea of the learned counsel for the respondents that the D.O. letter should be construed as a direction calling upon the Board to modify the portion of the scale framed by the Board. Section 43B(1A) has there fore no application to ... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Board is empowered to sell the goods if rates are not paid or lien for freight is not discharged. It can also dispose of goods not removed from the premises of the Board within the time limited. Section 65 also provides the mode of application of proceeds of the sale. Under section 66 the Board is entitled to distr... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The contention put forward on behalf of the respondents is that they are in no way responsible for the delay in clearing the goods as the goods had been detained under the Import Trade Control Regulations. It is no doubt true that before clearance is given by the Import Trade Control authorities and the Customs Departm... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Taking into account the hardship to the import ers certain concession has been given but the legality of the rates which are being levied according to law cannot be questioned. This view was taken by this Court in a recent decision reported in Trustees the Port of Madras vs M/s. Aminchand Pyarelal & Ors. (1) Where it h... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Supreme Court held that the scale of rates and statement of conditions flamed by the Madras Port Trust under sections 42, 43 and 43A are not by laws (1) ; 348 and the sections confer authority on the Board to frame a scale of rates at which and a statement or conditions under which any of the services specified the... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Justice Chandra chud, who spoke for the Court, observed in his judgment at page 736 supra that the statute had not placed any limita tion on the power of the Board to fix rates and as the Board had the power to frame a scale of rates at which and the statement of conditions under which any of the services specified in ... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | If however, for reasons other than the shipown er 's default, the chatterer becomes unable to do that which he contracted to do namely, put a full and complete cargo on board during the fixed laydays, the breach is never repaired, the damages are not completely mitigated, and the shipowner may recover the loss that he ... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The test that was laid down by Lord Esher Master of the Rolls, was. Has the shipowner failed in his duty through any default of his own or of persons for whom he is responsible ? As the non delivery was occasioned by something which the shipowner could not foresee or by the act of persons over whom he had any control i... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The claim cannot be resisted as there is no evidence that the delay was due to any act of the Port Trust or persons for whom the Port Trust is responsible. (1) [1891] 1 Q.B.p. 35. (2) [2953] 2 ALl. E.R. 508. | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 350 One other contention which was raised before the High Court but was not dealt with by it may be referred to. It was submitted on behalf of the respondents that the defini tion of the words "free days" would not include the period of holidays or part of a holiday or Sunday in computing the number of free days during... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The submission was that not only Sunday and holidays should be omitted but also other days on which Customs Duty may not be assessed or received will have to be omitted and this should be understood as days during which the Import Trade Control formalities could not be completed. This contention cannot be accepted as t... | The appellant, a statutory body framed the scales of rates of demurrage of goods under section 43 (a) of the Bombay 'Port Trust Act 1879 which was sanctioned by the Central Government. Later on the Central Government in its D.O. letter dated 7th September 1952 addressed to the appel lant expressed its view that it seem... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | N: Criminal. Appeal No. 330 of 1980. From the judgement and Order dated 3.4.1980 of the Madras High Court in Crl. Appeal No. 360 of 1974. | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Hardev Singh and Ms. Madhu Moolchandani for the Appellants. V.C. Mahajan, B. Parthasarthi and Ms. A. Subhashini for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KULDIP SINGH, J. The appellant N.M. Parthasarathy is the sole proprietor of a firm called "Elector technik". He was formerly working as Inspecto... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | He along with an Inspector of Industries, was prosecuted on the allegations that between February, 1967 and February, 1969 they entered into a criminal conspiracy to obtain Small Scale Industries Registration Certificate for additional lines of manufacture, Essentiality Certificate and import licences on false represen... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The State went in appeal against the judgment of acquittal and the High Court on re appreciation of evidence set side the acquittal and convicted both of them on all the counts. The appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 120 B IPC and rigorous imprisonment for two years for... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Mr. Hardev Singh has primarily argued that the High Court has grossly erred in reversing the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial court. According to him even if two views were possible the High Court was not justified in taking a different view than the trial court and reversing the acquittal. This precise argu... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The High Court examined the evidence on the record in detail and rightly came to the conclusion that the guilt against the appellant was established beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court on re appreciation of the evidence, independently reached the following findings: 252 "Thus it is established by Exhibit D 36 as we... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | "It has already been found that with the 230 Volts domestic supply he could not have produced any of the new end products. The additional machinery required for producing these new end products had not been installed in the first accused 's factory. It is hardly likely that all the alleged additional machinery could ha... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Therefore, I find that the prosecution has proved these two charges 4 and 5 against the accused satisfactorily and beyond all reasonable doubt." "In the present case both the accused have acted in concert in the first accused obtaining the S.S.I. registration certificate, Exhibit P 20 as amended by Exhibit P 21, the Es... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | We, therefore, uphold the conviction and sentence awarded by the High Court. While upholding the judgment of the High Court, we are inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the appellant that this is fit case where benefit of section 360, Criminal Procedure Code be extended to the appellant. The occurrence in thi... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Mr. Hardev Singh has placed before us documents showing several achievements of the appellant in the industrial field since then. The appellant 's industry has manufactured the largest Hot Air Kiln in India for Ministry of Railways, largest Degreasing plant for Nuclear Fuel Complex, Sintering Furnace for anti tank miss... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Special Court shall pass an order in terms of Section 360, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 to its satisfaction. A copy of this order be sent to the Special Court, Madras immediately. The appellant is directed to appear before the Special Court, Madras within two months from today to enable the Special Court, Madras t... | The appellant, (first accused), a former Inspector of Industries, alongwith an Inspector of Industries, (second accused), was prosecuted under section 120 B read with section 420 IPC, sections 5(1) (b) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the ground that both the accused entered into a criminal conspir... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.