http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 31  

PETITIONER: MAHARAJ SINGH

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & OTHERS

DATE OF JUDGMENT02/11/1976

BENCH: KRISHNAIYER, V.R. BENCH: KRISHNAIYER, V.R. KHANNA, HANS RAJ

CITATION:  1976 AIR 2602            1977 SCR  (1)1072  1977 SCC  (1) 155

ACT:             U.P.   Zamindari   Abolition   &   Land   Reforms   Act,         1950--Section  117--Scope  of--State  vests  lands  in  Gaon         Sabha--Suit    for    ejectment--Gaon    Sabha    did    not         appeal-State--If had locus standi.         Words & phrases--Vest Person  aggrieved--Appurtenance--Mean-         ing of

HEADNOTE:             By virtue of s. 4 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land         Reforms  Act, 1950, the right, title and interest of all the         intermediaries  in every estate including hats,  bazars  and         melas  stood terminated and vested absolutely in the  State.         Section  9 provides’ that all wells, trees in abadi and  all         buildings situate within the limits of an Estate,  belonging         to  an intermediary, shall continue to belong to or be  held         by such intermediary and the site  of  the  buildings  which         is  appurtenant thereto, shall be deemed to be settled  with         him  by the State Government.  Section 117(1)  empowers  the         State  Government to  vest  lands  in Gaon Sabhas  or  other         local  authorities.  Under s. 117(6) the  State   Government         has  power to resume from a Gaon Sabha the lands  vested  in         it.  By a notification under s. 117(1 ) the State Government         vested the land in the village in the Gaon Sabha.             On  the  estate in dispute, the defendant  who  was  the         quondam  zamindar, had been conducting a cattle  fair.   The         estate  had  on  it, among others, a  few  structures.   The         plaintiffs’  (the State and the Gaon Sabha) suit for  eject-         ment  of the defendant from the estate was dismissed by  the         trial  court.  The Gaon Sabha, however, did not appeal;  but         the  State  went in appeal to the High Court  as  ’a  person         aggrieved’.  The High Court negatived the defendants conten-         tions  that as a result of the notification under s.  117(1)         the  land  having   vested  in  the Gaon  Sabha,  the  State         Government had no locus standi and that it was not a  person         aggrieved, but allowed the defendant to keep all the  struc-         tures  and  a space of 5 yards running round each building.         Dismissing the appeal,             HELD: (1) The State has title to sustain the action   in         ejectment.   The Government, despite vesting the estates  in         Gaon  Sabhas has, and continues to have, a constant hold  on         these  estates,  when it chooses, to take away what  it  had

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 31  

       given  possession  of  to a Gaon  Sabha.   This  is  plainly         ’present  legal  interest’ in the Government and a  sort  of         precarium  tenans in the  Sabha.  [1082 D; 1079 F-G]             (a)  The Act contemplates taking over of  all  zamindari         rights  as  part of land reform.   Instead  of  centralising         management of all estates at State  level,  the Act gives an         enabling  power  to make over these states to  Gaon  Sabhas.         Apart  from management, no power is expressly vested in  the         Sabhas  to dispose of the estates absolutely.  If the  State         thinks  fit to amend or cancel the earlier vesting  declara-         tion  or notification it can totally deprive the  Sabha  of,         and  resume from it, any estate.  The vesting in  the  State         was absolute but the  vesting  in  the Sabha was limited  to         possession  and  management  subject   to   divestiture   by         Government.  Such a construction of vesting in two different         senses in the same section is sound because the word  ’vest’         has many meanings.  The sense of the situation suggests that         in s. 117(1) ’vested in the State’ carries a plenary  conno-         tation,  while  ’shall  vest in the Gaon  Sabha’  imports  a         qualified disposition confined to the right to full  posses-         sion  and  enjoyment so long  as  it  lasts.   To  postulate         vesting of absolute title in the Gaon Sabha by virtue of the         declaration under s. 117(1) is to stultify s. 117(6).  [1081         A-C; F-G]         1073             (b)  The State is ’a person aggrieved’.  He, who  has  a         proprietary   right,  which  has been or  is  threatened  by         violation, is an ’aggrieved person’.  The right to a  remedy         apart, a larger circle of persons can move the court for the         protection of defence or enforcement of a civil right or  to         ward  off or claim compensation for a civil wrong,  even  if         they are not  proprietarily  or  personally linked with  the         cause  of action.  The nexus between the lis and the  plain-         tiff  need not necessarily be personal.  A person  aggrieved         is  an expression which has expanded with the larger  urgen-         cies and felt necessities of our time. [1082 E-F]             (c)  The  amplitude of ’legal grievance’  has  broadened         with social compulsions.  The State undertakes today activi-         ties whose beneficiaries may  be  the general community even         though  the legal right to the, undertaking may not vest  in         the  community.   The State starts  welfare  projects  whose         effective implementation may call for collective action from         the  protected  group or any member of  them.   Test  suits,         class  actions and representative litigation are the  begin-         ning and the horizon is expanding with persons and   organi-         sations   not  personally injured but vicariously  concerned         being  entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the court  for         redressal of actual or imminent wrongs. [1083 A-C]         Dhabolkar [1976] 1 S.C.R. 306 followed.         ’Locus standi’ has a larger ambit in current legal semantics         than  the  accepted, individualistic jurisprudence  of  old.         Therefore,  the State, in the present case, is  entitled  to         appeal  under s. 96 of the= Code. of Civil Procedure.  [1084         D]              (2)  Where a wrong against community interest is  done,         ’no  locus standi’ will not always be a plea to non-suit  an         interested  public body chasing the wrongdoer in court.   In         the  instant case the Government is the ’aggrieved  person’.         Its  right  of resumption from the Gaon Sabha, meant  to  be         exercised  in  public interest will be seriously jeopardised         if  the  estate slips into the hands of a  trespasser.   The         estate  belonged to the State, is vested in the  Gaon  Sabha         for  community benefit, is controlled by the  State  through         directions to the Land Management Committee and is liable to         be  divested.  The wholesome object  of  the legislature  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 31  

       cautiously  decentralised vesting of estates in local  self-         governing units will be frustrated, if the State is to be  a         helpless spectator of its purposeful bounty being wasted  or         lost. [1083 H; 1084 A-B]             (3)(a) The touchstone of ’appurtenance’ is dependence of         the  building  on  what appertains to it for its  use  as  a         building.   Obviously  the hat,  bazar,  or mela is  not  an         appurtenance  to the building.  Even if the  buildings  were         used  and  enjoyed  in the past  with  the  whole.  st.retch         of.vacant space for a hat or mela, the land is not  appurte-         nant  to  the principal subject granted by s.   9,   namely,         buildings. [1085 G]            (b)  The larger objective of s. 9 is to settle  with  the         former  intermediary only such land as is strictly  appurte-         nant  to  buildings, all the rest going to  the  State.  for         implementation of the agrarian reform policy. [1084 G]                (c)  The  large open spaces cannot ,be  regarded   as         appurtenant  to  the terraces, stands and structures.   What         a  integral  is not necessarily appurtenant. A  position  of         subordination, something incidental or ancillary or  depend-         ent is implied in appurtenance.  That much of space required         for  the  use  of  the structures as such has been  excluded         by  the High Court  itself.  Beyond  that may or may not  be         necessary  for the hat or mela but not for the enjoyment  of         the chabutras as such. [1085  B-C]             (d)  ’Appurtenance’ in relation to a dwelling,  includes         all land occupied therewith and used for the purposes there-         of.   The word ’appurtenances’ has a distinct  and  definite         meaning.   Prima facie it imports nothing more than what  is         strictly appertaining to the subject-matter of the devise or         grant.   What  is necessary for the enjoyment and  has  been         used  for  the purpose of the building,  such  as  easement,         alone  will  be appurtenant.  The. word  ’appurtenance’  in-         cludes  all  the incorporeal hereditaments attached  to  the         land granted or demised such as rights of way, but does  not         include lands in addition to that granted. [1086 D-E]             (e)  What  the High Court has granted viz., 5  yards  of         surrounding space is sound in law. [1086 H]         1074

JUDGMENT:         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1 of 1976.             Appeal  by  Special Leave from the  Judgment  and  Order         dated 23-5-1975 of the Allahabad High Court in First  Appeal         No. 392/ 64.             Shana  Bhushan,  V.P. Goel and Subodh  Markendeya,   for         the Appellant.             L.N.  Sinha, Solicitor-General of India and  O.P.  Rana,         for  the Respondent No. 1.              Bal Kishan Gaur and Amlan Ghosh, for Respondent No. 2.              Yogeshwar Prasad and Rani Arora, for Respondent No. 3.             The Judgment of the Court was delivered by              KRISHNA  IYER,  J.--Two  principal  submissions,  whose         implications’ perhaps are of profound moment and have public         impact,  have  been, at wide-ranging length, urged  in  this         appeal  by  certificate,  by Shri Shanti  Bhushan,  for  the         appellant/defendant and, with effective brevity, controvert-         ed  by the Solicitor General, for respondent/1st  plaintiff.         The  two  focal points of the controversy are:  (a)  Is  the         appeal  to the High Court by the State 1st plaintiff at  all         competent, entitlement as a ’party aggrieved’ being  absent,         having regard to the provisions of the U.P. Zamindari Aboli-         tion  and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U.P. Act 1 of  1951)  (for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 31  

       short,  the  Act) ?; and (b) Is it  sound  to  conceptualise         ’area  appurtenant to buildings’ in s. 9 of the Act so  nar-         rowly as has been’ done by the High Court ?  There were  two         plaintiffs--the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Gaon Sabha of         Bedpura  claiming common but alternative reliefs.  The  suit         was  for  injunction  or ejectment, on title,  of  the  sole         defendant who was the quondam zamindar of the ’estate’ which         is  the ’subject matter of the suit.  The trial  Court  dis-         missed  the suit whereupon the 2nd plaintiff dropped out  of         the litigation, as it were, and the State alone pursued  the         matter by way of appeal against the decree.  The High  Court         partially allowed the appeal and the aggrieved defendant  is         the appellant before us.             An  expose of the facts may now be given to  the  extent         necessary  for  explaining  the setting  of  the  contention         between  the  parties.  The State of  Uttar  Pradesh  extin-         guished  all zamindari estates by the Act and implemented  a         scheme  of settlement of lands with intermediaries,  tenants         and  others  by first vesting all estates in the  State  and         empowering it to vest, divest and re-vest flora time to time         according  to  flexible needs and ad hoc  requirements,  the         same  estate’s  in Gaon Sabhas or other  local  authorities.         Settlement of trees,  buildings and other specified items in         the intermediaries was also part of the agrarian reform.   A         skeletal  picture of the legislation may now  be  projected.         But,  before that, a short sketch of the actual dispute  may         illumine the further discussion.             The  suit  lands were part of an estate  owned  and.pos-         sessed  by the defendant-zamindarini.  The statutory  conse-         quence  of the abolition of all zamindaris by force of s.  4         is spelt out in s. 6, to wit, the         1075         cesser of the ownership of the zamindar and vesting of title         and  possession  in the State.  By a notification  under  s.         117(1) of the Act the area of lands was vested by the  State         in the 2nd plaintiff Gaon Sabha. The legislative  nullifica-         tion notwithstanding, the defendant who had been  conducting         a lucrative bi-weekly cattle fair, the best in the district,         persisted in this profitable adventure strengthened by s.  9         of  the Act which settles in the intermediary all  buildings         and  area appurtenant thereto.  This resulted in  possessory         disputes between the Gaon Sabha and the  defendant--proceed-         ings under s. 145 upholding the latter’s possession and  the         present  suit  for declaration of  title  and  consequential         injunction or ejectment.             The  estate, which is the site of the rural cattle  mar-         ket,  has  a large number of trees on it, a  temple  in  one         plot, a (veterinary) clinic in another and quite a number of         cattle  stands  and  other auxiliary  structures  which  are         facilities  for  the   bovine display  and   transaction  of         business.   Taking advantage of the provisions of  the  Act,         the  defendant  successfully claimed before the  High  Court         that  the  trees and the two plots with the shrine  and  the         oushadhalaya should be deemed to have been settled with her.         Her ambitious demand, based on some provisions which we will         presently  X-ray more carefully, was that the entire  estate         with  all the buildings thereon was enjoyed as a  unum  quid         and  th.e vacant lands were as much necessary for the  mean-         ingful  running of the cattle fair as the  structures  them-         selves.  To dissect and detach the buildings from the vacant         spaces was to destroy the functional wholeness of the  serv-         ice  rendered.  In short, the large intervening  areas  sur-         rounding the  chabutras  and other edifices  were  essential         adjuncts  or  appurtenant  lands which,  together  in  their         original  entirety, should be settled under s. 9 of the  Act

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 31  

       with  the erstwhile intermediary viz., the  defendant.   The         High  Court declined to go the whole hog with the  defendant         but granted the plea to the limited degree of giving all the         structures and a space of 5 yards running round each ’build-         ing’.   In  the view of the Court hats,  bazars,  and  melas         could not be held by a private owner under the scheme of the         Act  and reliance on the conduct of the cattle market as  an         indicator of ’appurtenant’ area was, therefore,  impermissi-         ble.  The suit was decreed pro tanto.             The  Gaon  Sabha,  when defeated  in  the  trial  Court,         discreetly  stepped  out of the risks of an appeal  but  the         Government,  first  plaintiff, claiming to  be  gravely  ag-         grieved, challenged the dismissal of the suit and was  faced         with the plea that the land having vested in the Gaon Sabha,         on  the issue of the notification under s. 117 (1 )  of  the         Act,  .the State had no surviving interest in  the  property         and,  therefore,  forfeited  the position of  a  person  ag-         grieved,  who alone could competently appeal against  a  de-         cree.   This contention, negatived  by the High  Court.  has         been  reiterated before us with  resourceful  embellishments         and  that, logically, is the first question of  law  falling         for our decision and is the piece de resistance,  if we  may         say  so,  in  this appeal.  If the  1st  plaintiff’s  entire         interests,  by subsequent plenary vesting in the 2nd  plain-         tiff, have perished, the former cannot, as of right,  appeal         under s. 96 C.P.C. Survival after death is unknown to         1076         real  property law and suits, without at  least  apprehended         injury, are beyond the ken of the procedural law.  To put it         in a nutshell, has the State current interest in the estate,         sufficient to sustain an appeal ?             The  anatomy of the Act, so far as this dispute is  con-         cerned,  needs  to be’ set out and  alongside  thereof,  the         exercises in statutory construction necessary to resolve the         two legal disputes.  The Act had for its primary object,  as         testified  by its Preamble, the extinction  of  intermediary         rights  viz.,  zamindaris  and the like.  The  goal  of  the         legislation  must make its presence felt while the  judicial         choice of meanings of words of ambiguous import or plurality         of  significations  is made. Section 4 is  the  foundational         provision, the very title deed of the State; and it runs, to         read:                       "s. 4. Vesting of estates in the State.--                           (1 ) As soon as may be after the commence-                       ment of this Act, the State Government may, by                       notification,  declare that, as from a date to                       be specified, all estate situate in the  Uttar                       Pradesh  shall vest in the State and  as  from                       the beginning of the date so specified (herin-                       after  called the date of vesting),  all  such                       estates  shall stand transferred to  and  vest                       except  as hereinafter provided, in the  State                       free from all encumbrances.                           (2)  It  shall  be lawful  for  the  State                       Government,  if it so considers necessary,  to                       issue,  from  time to time,  the  notification                       referred to in sub-section (1) in respect only                       of such area or areas as may be specified  and                       all  the provisions of sub-section (1),  shall                       be  applicable  to. and in the case  of  every                       such notification."         Section  6 sets out the legal consequences of  such  vesting         more specifically.  We may extract the provision:                       "6.  Consequences of the vesting of an  estate                       in the State.--

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 31  

                         When the notification under section 4  has                       been  published in the Gazette then,  notwith-                       standing anything contained in any contract or                       document  or  in any other law  for  the  time                       being in force and save as otherwise  provided                       in  this Act, the consequences as  hereinafter                       set forth shall, from the begining of the date                       of  vesting,  ensue in the area to  which  the                       notification relates, namely--                       (a) all rights, title and interest of all  the                       intermediaries--                           (i) in every estate in such area including                       land   (cultivable  or  barren),   grove-land,                       forests  whether   within or  outside  village                       boundaries, trees (other than trees in village                       abadi,  holding or grove),  fisheries,  tanks,                       ponds, water-channels, fernes, pathways, abadi                       sites,   hats,  bazars and  meals  other  than                       hats, bazars and melas held upon land to which                       clauses  (a)  to  (c) of  sub-section  (1)  of                       Section 18 apply, and                       1077                           (ii)  in  all  sub-soil  in  such  estates                       including  rights, if any in mines and  miner-                       als, whether being worked or not;                       shall  ’cease  and be vested in the  State  of                       Uttar Pradesh free from all encumbrances;         *               *               *                  *         Reading  the  two sister sections  together,  certain  clear         conclusions emerge.  Emphatically, three things happened  on         the  coming  into force of the Act.  By virtue of s.  4  the         right,  title  and interest of all intermediaries  in  every         estate, including hats, bazars and melas, stood  terminated.         Secondly,  this whole bundle of interests came to be  vested         in the State, free from all encumbrances, the quality of the         vesting  being absolute. ’Thirdly, one and only one  species         of property in hats, bazars and melas was expressly excluded         from  the total vesting of estates in the State, viz.,  such         as  had been held on lands to which s. 18(1)(a) to  (c)  ap-         plied.  Section 9, at this stage, needs to be read since  it         is geared to the nationalisation of zamindaris by  providing         for  settlement, under the State, of some kind’s  of  landed         interests  in  existing  owners  or  occupiers.   Section  9         states:                       "Private  wells, trees in abadi and  buildings                       to  be  settled with the  existing  owners  or                       occupiers thereof--                           All wells, trees in abadi, and all  build-                       ings  situate within the limits of an  estate,                       belonging  to or held  by an  intermediary  or                       tenant  or other person, whether  residing  in                       the  village or not, shall continue to  belong                       to. or be held by such intermediary, tenant or                       persons, as the case may be,, and the site, of                       the wells or the buildings which are  appurte-                       nant thereto: shall be. deemed to. be  settled                       with him by the State Government on such terms                       and conditions as may be prescribed"         A  close-up  of this section is called for since  the  basic         plank of  the defendant’s case is the claim to the whole set         of plots as building and appurtenant area of land statutori-         ly settled with her. If she is such a settlee, the  substan-         tive  merit  of the  plaintiff’s  title   fails.   We   will         examine this aspect after a survey of the sections  relevant         to the locus standi of the State is done.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 31  

           So we shift to Chapter VII which relates to Gaon  Sabhas         vesting  by  the State of resumed estates in  them  and  the         limitations  and  other conditions to which it  is  subject.         Attributed  legal  personality by s.3, the Gaon  Sabhas  are         bodies  corporate  which, under the  various  provisions  of         Chapter VII, have been invested  with legal  viability right         to  own  and hold property, to transfer and  otherwise  deal         with  movables and immovables and manage their landed assets         through  the  executive  agency  of  Land  Management   Com-         mittees.  This comprehensive ’proprietary personality of the         Sabha is indisputable but unhelpful for our purpose.         1078         The  controversy before us comes into focus when we read  s.         117 (1), (2) and (6), all the limbs being  taken as  belong-         ing to a  legally living corporate body.  Section 117,  cls.         (1) and (2), provide:                           "117.  Vesting of certain lands  etc.,  in                       Gaon Shabhas and other local authorities.--                           (1 ) At any time after the publication  of                       the notification referred to in Section 4, the                       State  Government may, by general  or  special                       order  to  be  published in  the  manner  pre-                       scribed,  declare  that as from a date  to  be                       specified  in this behalf, all or any  of  the                       following things, namely--                       *         *        *            *        *                           (v)  hats, bazars and melas  except  hats,                       bazars,  and melas held on land to which,  the                       provisions  of clauses (a) to (c) of  sub-sec-                       tion  (1) of section 18 apply or on sites  and                       areas referred to in section 9, and                       *       *        *             *         *         which  had vested in the State under this Act shall vest  in         the  Gaon  Sabhas or and other local  authority  established         t.or  the  whole or part of the village in  which  the  said         things  are situate, or partly in one such  local  authority         (including a Gaon Sabha) and partly in another:             Provided  that it shall be lawful for the State  Govern-         ment  to  make the declaration aforesaid   subject  to  such         exceptions and conditions as may be specified in the notifi-         cation.                           (2) Notwithstanding anything contained  in                       this  Act  or in any other law’ for  the  time                       being in  force,  the State Government may, by                       general or special order  to  be published  in                       the manner prescribed in the Gazette,  declare                       that  as from a date to be specified  in  this                       behalf, all or any of the things specified  in                       clauses  (i) to (vi) of sub-section (1)  which                       alter  their vesting in the State  under  this                       Act  had  been vested in a Gaon Sabha  or  any                       other  local authority, either under this  Act                       or  under  section 126 of  the  Uttar  Pradesh                       Nagar  Mahapalika Adhiniyam 1959 (U.P. Act  II                       of  1959) shall vest in any other  .local  au-                       thority  (including a Gaon Sabha)  established                       for the whole or part of the village in  which                       the said things are situated."         Section 117(6) injects a precarious does into the system  of         estates  vested in Gaon Sabhas by sub-s.(1) and goes  on  to         state:                             "117(6).  The State Government  may,  at                       any  time,  by  general or  special  order  to                       be published  in the manner prescribed,  amend                       or cancel any declaration or notification made

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 31  

                     in  respect of any of the  things  aforesaid.’                       whether                       1079                       generally or in the case of any Gaon Sabha  or                       other  local authority, and resume such  thing                       and  whenever the State Government so  resumes                       any such thing, the Gaon Sabha or other. local                       authority, as the case may be, shall be  enti-                       tled  to receive and be paid  compensation  on                       account  only  of  the  development,  if  any,                       effected by it in. or over that thing:                           Provided  that the State  Government  may,                       after  such resumption, make a fresh  declara-                       tion under sub-section (1) or sub-section  (2)                       vesting the  thing resumed in the same or  any                       other  local  authority  (including  a    Gaon                       Sabha) and the provisions of sub-sections (3),                       (4) and (5) as the case may be, shall  mutatis                       mutandis, apply to such declaration.                        *         *       *         *         *              Before  moving  further, we may glance at  a  group  of         sections which have more than peripheral impact on the legal         equation  between  Government  and Sabha  visa  vis  estates         vested in the latter by the former.   Section 119 carves out         a  power for the State Government to take away hats,  bazars         and  melas  vested in a Gaon Sabha and transfer  them  to  a         zilla  parishad or other authority.  Sections 122A and  122B         create  and regulate the Land Management Committee which  is         to administer the estates vested in the Sabha   and s.  126,         quite  importantly, gives the power to the State  Government         to issue orders and directions to the Management Committee.            Pausing  here  for an instant, let us look  back  on  the         status    of the State which, through its Executive  branch,         vests a resumed estate in a Gaon Sabha, retaining power,  at         any time, and without conditions or even compensation  (save         for  actual developmental work done), to divest the land  so         vested  and  make it over to another like  local  authority.         In  such  a  situation where the State  remains   the  legal         master  with  absolute powers of disposition over  the  land         vested  pro  tempore in a particular Gaon Sabha, can  it  be         postulated that it has no legal interest in the preservation         of  that  over which it has continuous power  of  operation,         creation  and  deprivation?   Government,  despite   vesting         estates in Gaon  Sabhas  on the  wholesome political princi-         ple  of decentralisation and local self-government, has  and         continues  to have a constant hold on these estates, may  be         like a brooding omnipotence descending, when it chooses,  to         take away what it had given possession of to a Sabha.   This         is  plainly present legal interest in Government and a  sort         of precarium tenans in the Sabha, notwithstanding the  illu-         sory  expression  ’vesting’ which may mislead one  into  the         impression   that an  absolute and  permanent ownership  has         been created.             An  overview  of these legal  prescriptions,  makes  one         sceptical about the statutory ideology of autonomous village         self-government  since,  so far as  estates  are  concerned,         these Sabhas have been handcuffed and thrown at the mercy or         mood of the State Government. The pragmatics of the Act  has         reduced Gaon Sabhas to obedient         1080         holders,  for  the nonce, of the limited bounty  of  estates         vested in them --a formal, fickle, homage to Art. 40 of  the         Constitution!             Shri Shanti Bhushan did draw our  attention to   certain         cousin  statutes and other ’remotely related provisions  but

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 31  

       the soul of his submission does not suffer by their omission         in the discussion.   We pass on to the spinal issues agitat-         ed before us.         Locus standi             The estates first vest in the State.  The fulfilment  of         the  purpose  of the Act, the setting in which  the  corner-         stone for the statutory edifice is laid and the  categorical         language  used,  especially ’free  from  all  encumbrances’,         leave no doubt in our minds, nor was it disputed before  us,         that  this initial vesting is absolute and  inaugurates  the         scheme of abolition.  The consequence of vesting articulated         by s. 6 only underscore this conclusion.             What  next  ensues. when the State  Government,   acting         under  s.117(1), notifies a further vesting in a Gaon  Sabha         is the cardinal question.   Does the State retain a  residu-         ary  legal  interest, sufficient to make it  a  ’person  ag-         grieved’,  competent to challenge in appeal an  adverse  de-         cree?    And  can the State canvas for the position  that  a         proprietary  right persists in it albeit its act of  vesting         the same estate earlier in a local authority?   Does the key         word ’vest’ connote and denote divergent things in the  same         section and Act visa vis Government and the Gaon Sabha?  Had         drafting  skills been better, this unlovely ambiguity  could         have been avoided.   But courts have  no choice but to  take         the text as it is.   Zeroing in on the relevant  provisions,         we are inclined to concur with the High Court.   With certi-         tude one may assert that the State has that minimal interest         to  follow the proprietary fortunes of the estate so as  to.         entitle  it to. take legal action to interdict  its  getting         into alien hands.             The legislative project and the legal engineering visua-         lised   by the Act are clear and the semantics of the  words         used  in the provisions must bend, if they can, to  subserve         them.   To be literal or be blinkered by some rigid canon of         construction  may  be to miss the life of  the  law  itself.         Strength  may be derived for this interpretative stand  from         the observation in a recent judgment of this Court(1)                       "A word can have many meanings.   To find  out                       the exact connotation of a word in a  statute,                       we  must  look to the context in which  it  is                       used.   The context would quite often  provide                       the  key to meaning of the word and the  sense                       it’  should  carry.   Its setting  would  give                       colour  to it and provide a cue to the  inten-                       tion  of the legislature in using it. A  word,                       as  said by Holmes, is not a crystal,   trans-                       parent  and  unchanged; it is the  skin  of  a                       living thought and may vary greatly in  colour                       and content according to the circumstances and                       the time in which it is used."         (1)  Thiru  Manickaru  & Co. v. The  State  of  Tamil  Nadu.         [1977] 1 S.C.R. 950.         1081         In the instant case the Act contemplates taking over of  all         zamindari rights as part of land reform.   However,  instead         of   centralising management of all estates at State  level,         to  stimulate local self-government, the Act gives  an  ena-         bling power--not obligatory duty--to make over these estates         to  Gaon Sabhas which, so long as they are in  their  hands,         will  look  after them through management  committees  which         will  be  under the statutory control  of  Government  under         s.126. Apart from management, no. power is expressly  vested         in  the Sabhas to dispose of the estates  absolutely.    The         fact  that as a body corporate it can own and sell  property         does  not  mean that the estates vested in a  Sabha  can  be

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 31  

       finally sold away, in the teeth of the provisions striking a         contrary note.   For, under s.117(6), if, for any reasons of         better management or other, the State (Government is but the         operational  arm of the State and cannot, as  contended,  be         delinked as a separate entity, in this context)  the.  State         thinks  fit to amend or cancel the earlier vesting  declara-         tion  or notification, it can totally deprive the Sabha  of,         and  resume  from  it, any estate.  This  plenary  power  to         emasculate or extinguish the Sabha’s right to the estate  is         tell-tale.   True,  this cut-back on the  amplitude  of  the         vesting  is  not an incident of the estate  created  but  is         provided for by the Act itself.   Even so, we have to  envi-         sion, in  terms of realty law, what are the nature and inci-         dents  of the interest vested in the  Sabha--full  ownership         divestible under no circumstances or partial estate with the         paramount interest still surviving in praesenti in the State         ?             It  is reasonable to harmonize the statutory  provisions         to  reach  a solution which will be least  incongruous  with         legal  rights we  are cognisant of in current jurisprudence.         Novelty is not a favoured child of the law.   So it is right         to  fix the estate created by s.117 into familiar moulds  if         any.   Such  an approach lends to  the  position  that   the         vesting  in  the State was absolute but the vesting  in  the         Sabha  was limited to possession and management  subject  to         divestiture    by  Government.   Is such a  construction  of         ’vesting’ in two different senses in the same section, sound         ?   Yes.   It is, because ’vesting’ is a  word  of  slippery         import  and has many meanings.   The  context  controls  the         text  and  the  purpose and scheme  Project  the  particular         semantic  shade  or nuance of meaning.   That  is  why  even         definition  clauses allow themselves to be modified by  con-         textual compulsions. So the sense of the situation  suggests         that in s.117(1) of the Act "vested in the State’ carries  a         plenary  connotation, while ’shall vest in the  Gaon  Sabha’         imports  a  qualified disposition confined to the  right  to         full possession and enjoyment so long as it lasts.   Lexico-         graphic  support is forthcoming, for this meaning.   Black’s         Law Die-         1082         tionary gives as the sense of ’to vest as ’to give an  imme-         diate fixed right of present or future enjoyment, to  clothe         with possession, to deliver full possession of land or of an         estate,  to give seisin’. Webster’s III  International  Dic-         tionary gives the meaning as ’to give to a person a  legally         fixed immediate right of present or furture enjoyment’.         The   High   Court   has  sought   some   Engilsh   judicial         backing(1)  for  taking liberties with strict  and  pedantic         construction.   A  ruling of this Court(2)  has  been  aptly         pressed into service.             There  is thus authority for the position that  the  ex-         pression  ’vest’ is of fluid or flexible content and can  if         the context so dictates, bear the limited sense of being  in         possession  and enjoyment.  Indeed, to postulate vesting  of         absolute title in the Gaon Sabha by virtue  of the  declara-         tion under s.117(1) of the Act is to stultify s.117(6).  Not         that  the legislature cannot create a right to  divest  what         has   been completely vested but that an explanation of  the         term  ’vesting’  which will rationalise  and  integrate  the         initial  vesting and  the subsequent resumption is  prefera-         ble,  more plausible and better fulfils the purpose  of  the         Act.  We hold that the State has title to sustain he  action         in ejectment.             Aside  from  this stand, it is easy to  take  the   view         that  the  1st plaintiff is a person I aggrieved and has the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 31  

       competence to carry  an appeal against the dismissal of  the         suit.  Of course, he who has a proprietary right, which  has         been  or  is threatened to be violated, is  surely  an  ’ag-         grieved person’.   A legal injury  creates  a remedial right         in the injured person.   But the right to a remedy apart,  a         larger circle of persons can move the court for the  protec-         tion  of defence or enforcement of a civil right or to  ward         off  or claim compensation for a civil wrong, even  if  they         are  not proprietarily or  personally linked with the  cause         of  action.    The nexus between the lis and  the  plaintiff         need not necessarily be personal although it has to be  more         than a wayfarer’s allergy to an  unpalatable  episode.    ’A         person  aggrieved’  is an expression   which  has   expanded         with  the   larger  urgencies and felt  necessities  of  our         times.     Processual  jurisprudence is not  too  jejune  to         respond to societal changes and challenges:                       "Law  necessarily has to carry within  it  the                       impress  of the past traditions, the  capacity                       to  respond  to the needs of the  present  and                       enough resilience to cope with the demands  of                       the future.   A code of law, especially in the                       social  fields, is not a document for  fastid-                       ious dialectics; properly drafted and  rightly                       implemented it can be the means of the  order-                       ing of the life of a people."(3)             (1)  Richardson v. Robertson (1862) 6 L-R 75; & .Hiride         v. Chorlton (1866) 2 CP 104, 116.             (2)  Fruit  & Vegetable Merchant’s Union  v.  The  Delhi         Improvement Dust, AIR 1957 SC 344.            (3) Address by--Khanna 1. at the Birth  Centenary of  Sir         Tej  Bahadur Sapru d/16-10-76 at Allahabad.         1083             The classical concept of a ’person aggrieved’  is delin-         eated  in Re : Sidebotham ex p. Sidebotham  (1880  14  Ch.D.         258).  But the amplitude of ’legal grievance’ has  broadened         with social compulsions.   The State undertakes today activ-         ities whose beneficiaries may be the general community  even         though  the legal right to  the undertaking may not vest  in         the  community.    The State starts welfare  projects  whose         effective implementation may call for collective action from         the  protected group. or any member of them.  New  movements         like consumerism, new people’s organs like harijan or mahila         samajams or labour unions, new protective institutions  like         legal aid societies operate on the socio-legal plane, not to         beat  ’their golden wings in the void’ but to  intervene  on         behalf of the  weaker classes.   Such burgeoning of  collec-         tive social action has, in turn, generated gradual processu-         al adaptations.   Test suits, class actions and  representa-         tive  litigation are the beginning and the horizon   is  ex-         pending,  with  persons  and  organisations  not  personally         injured but vicariously concerned being entitled to.  invoke         the  jurisdiction   of the court for redressal of actual  or         imminent wrongs.             In this wider perspective, who is a ’person aggrieved ’?         Dhabolkar (1974 1 SCR 306) gives the updated answer:                       "The  test  is whether the words  ’person  ag-                       grieved’  include       a  person  who  has  a                       genuine  grievance because an  order has  been                       made  which prejudicially affects  his  inter-                       ests’."                                     (p. 315)                       "American  jurisprudence has  recognised,  far                       instance, the expanding importance of consumer                       protection in the economic system and  permit-                       ted  consumer  organisations to.  initiate  or

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 31  

                     intervene in actions,  although by  the narrow                       rule  of ’locus standi’, such a  course  could                       not have been justified (see p. 807--New  York                       University  Law Review, Vol. 46,  1971).    In                       fact, citizen organisations have recently been                       compaigning  for using legal actions for  pro-                       tection of community interest, broadening  the                       scope of ’standing’ in legal proceedings  (see                       p. 403--Boston University Law Review,  Vol.51.                       1971).                       In the well-known case of Attorney-General  of                       the  Gambia v. Peirra Sarr N. ’Jie  1961  A.C.                       617),  Lord Denning observed about the  Attor-                       ney-General’s standing thus:                       "   ....  The words ’person aggrieved’ are  of                       wide  import and should not be subjected to  a                       restrictive  interpretation. They do  not  in-                       clude,  of  course, a mere busy  body  who  is                       interfering  in  things which do  not  concern                       him;  but they do include a person who  has  a                       genuine  grievance because an order has   been                       made    which   prejudicially   affects    his                       interests." (p. 324-325)             Where  a wrong against community interest is  done,  ’no         locus  standi’  will  not always be a plea  to  non-suit  an         interested-public body chasing the wrong-doff in court.   In         the case before us, Govern-         1084         ment,   in   the  spacious  sense of ’person  aggrieved’  is         comfortably placed.   Its, right of resumption from the Gaon         Sabha,  meant  to be exercised in public interest,  will  be         seriously jeopardised if the estate slips into the hands  of         a trespasser.   The  estate belonged to the State, is vested         in  the Gaon Sabha for community benefit, is  controlled  by         the State through directions to the  Land Management Commit-         tee  and  is  liable to be divested without  ado  any  time.         The wholesome object of the legislature of cautiously decen-         tralised  vesting of estates in local  self-governing  units         will be frustrated, if the State, the watchdog of the  whole         project,  is to be a helpless. spectator of  its  purposeful         bounty being wasted or lost.   It must act, out of  fidelity         to  the goal of the statute and the continuing duty to  sal-         vage  public  property for public use.    Long  argument  is         otiose to make out a legal grievance in such a situation  of         peril  and, after all,  the star of processual  actions  pro         bono publico has to be on the. ascendant in a society  where         supineness must be substituted  by  activism if the  dynamic         rule  of  law  is to fulfil itself.  ’Locus  standi’  has  a         larger ambit in current legal semantics than  the  accepted,         individualistic jurisprudence of old.   The legal dogmas  of         the quiet past are no longer adequate to. assail the  social         injustices of the stormy present.   Therefore, the State, in         the present case, is entitled   to appeal under s. 96 of the         Code of Civil Procedure.             The  second, and from a practical point of view  equally         potent  ground  of  defence,  is  that  ’appurtenant’  space         envelops  the  whole area around the buildings and the  suit         for  recovery of possession deserves to be dismised in toto.         Let us examine this submission.             Section  9  of the Act obligates the  State  to   settle         (indeed, it is deemed to be settled) with the   intermediary         certain items  in the estate.   That provision has been  set         out earlier.   The short enquiry is whether the entire  land         is ’appurtenant’ to the buildings.    The contention of  the         defendant flows along these lines.   The structures accepted

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 31  

       by  the High Court as ’buildings’ within the scope of  s.  9         were part of a  cattle fair  complex.   Even the mandir  and         the oushadalya fitted in to the hat total and the  integrity         of  the whole could not be broken up without  violating  the         long years of common enjoyment.   It would also be, a double         injury: (a) to the defendant; and (b) to the community.  The         hat  or mela could not be held by the defendant if the  land         were snatched away and the Government could do. nothing on a         land  without  the  buildings belonging  to  the  defendant.         Maybe there is some sociological substance in the: presenta-         tion  but  the  broader purpose of the’  section  cannot  be         sacrificed  to the marginal cases .like the. present.    The         larger  objective is to settle with the former  intermediary         only. such  land  as  is  strictly appurtenant to buildings,         all  the rest going to the State for implementation  of  the         agrarian reform policy.             The  key to the solution of the dispute lies  in  ascer-         taining whether land on which the cattle fair was being held         was  appurtenant to the buildings or not on the strength  of         its  use  for the hat.  The Solicitor General  made  a  two-         pronged attack on the defendant’s proposition.         1085         Firstly,  he argued that hats, bazars and melas were a  dis-         tinct  interest  in the scheme of Indian agrestic  life  and         agrarian law.  This right had been virtually nationalised by         the Act and only the State or the Gaon Sabha. save where  s.         18(a)  to  (c) otherwise provided, could hold  a  ’fair.   A         ruling  by this Court on an analogous subject lends  support         to  this   contention (See State of Bihar v.  Dulhin  Shanti         Devi: AIR 1967 SC 427 relating to Bihar Land Reforms Act).         The heated debate at the bar on this and allied aspects need         not detain us further  also because  of our concurrence with         the  second  contention of the Solicitor  General  that  the         large open spaces cannot be regarded as appurtenant to   the         terraces,   stands  and structures. What is integral is  not         necesarily  appurtenant.    A  position  of   subordination,         something incidental or ancillary or dependant is implied in         appurtenance.  Can we say that the large spaces are subsidi-         ary  or ancillary to or inevitably implied in the  enjoyment         of the buildings qua buildings? that much of space  required         for  the use of the structures as such has been excluded  by         the  High  Court   itself.  Beyond that may or  may  not  be         necessary  for the hat or mela but not for the enjoyment  of         the  chabutras as such.  A hundred acres may spread  out  in         front of a club house for various games like golf.  But  all         these  abundant acres are unnecessary for nor incidental  to         the enjoyment of the house in any reasonable manner.  It  is         confusion to miss the distinction, fine but real.         "Appurtenance’,  in relation to a dwelling, or to a  school,         college ....  includes all land occupied therewith and  used         for   the  purpose  thereof  (Words  and   Phrases   Legally         Defined---Butterworths, 2nd edn). "The word  ’appurtenances’         has  a  distinct and definite meaning   ....Prima  facie  it         imports  nothing more than what is strictly appertaining  to         the subject-matter of the devise or grant, and which  would,         in truth, pass without being specially mentioned:Ordinarily,         what  is necessary for the enjoyment and has been  used  for         the purpose of the building, such as easements,  alone  will         be appurtenant.  Therefore, what is necessary for the enjoy-         ment  of  the building is alone covered  by  the  expression         ’appurtenance’.   If some other purpose was being  fulfilled         by the building and the lands, it is not possible to contend         that  those  lands are covered by the  expression  ’appurte-         nances’.  Indeed ’it is settled by the  earliest  authority,         repeated  without  contradiction to the  latest,  that  land

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 31  

       cannot  be  appurtenant to land.  The  word  ’appurtenances’         includes  all the incorporeal hereditaments attached to  the         land  granted  or  demised,  such  as  rights  of  way,   of         common ...but it does not include lands in addition to  that         granted’.  (Words and Phrase, supra).             In short, the touchstone of ’appurtenance’ is dependence         of  the building on what appertains to it for its use  as  a         building.   Obviously,  the  hat, bazar or mela  is  not  an         appurtenance  to  the building.  The law thus leads  to  the         clear  conclusion that even if the buildings were  used  and         enjoyed  in the past with the whole stretch of vacant  space         for a hat or mela, the land is not appurtenant to the  prin-         cipal subject granted by s. 9, viz., buildings.             This  conclustion is inevitable, although  the  contrary         argument may be ingenious.  What the High  Court has  grant-         ed, viz., 5 yards of         1086          surrounding  space,  is  sound in  law  although  based  on         guess-work in fact.  The appeal fails and is dismissed  but,         in  the  circumstances, without costs.         P.B.R.                                   Appeal dismissed.         13.385CI/76---GIPF.                                            INDEX         ACCOMPLICE:         Whether a pointer an accomplice         [See Representation of the People  Act.]  ...... 525         ACCUSED PLEADED GUILTY         If lesser sentence could be awarded.         Murlidhar Meghraj Loya etc. v.         State of Maharashtra etc.    .. 1         ADMISSIONS:         admissibility in evidence         [See Evidence Act]           .. 967         ADMINISTRATION  OF EVACUEE PROPERTY ACT,  1950--S.40(4)  (a)         and rule 22--Scope of, S. 10(2) (n) out of the funds in  his         possession meaning of.         Custodian of Evacuee Property v.               Smt. Rabia Bai           .. 255         ALTERNATE REMEDY         --Whether  a bar to writ jurisdiction under  Art. 226 of the         Constitution       under      Art      226      of       the         constitution.                     .. 64         [See Constitution of India, 1950]     ... 64         ANDHRA    PRADESH   (ANDHRA   AREA)    Electricity    Supply         Undertaking(Acquisition)   Act  (Andhra  15of   1954),   Ss.         5(3)(vi), 6(2)(a) (iii)  and  10(2)(b)(iii)--Amounts due  to         undertaking from consumers prior to vesting in State-If  can         be recovered by State from the licence.         Vijayawada  Municipal Council v. Andhra Pradesh State  Elec-         tricity Board and Anr.             .. 846         ANDHRA   PRADESH  GENERAL SALES TAX  ACT,  1957--Excise  and         countervailing  duty  paid by the buyers directly  into  the         Treasury  --Neither  the invoice nor books of  the  assessee         (manufacturer) show the excise duty--Excise  duty. If  fails         under  "any  sums charge by the dealer"   occurring  in  the         definition of "turnover".         M/s  Mc Dowell & Company Ltd. etc. v. Commercial Tax  Office         VII Circle Hyderabad etc.         APPEAL   AGAINST   ACQUITT  OF  AN  OFFENCE   OF   CONSUMING         LIQUOR--Mem  because the High Court took view  that  a  fur-         ther  charge "possession of liquor"   she have  been  framed         setting aside the acquittal without   find whether the order         of  acquittal  erroneous  and ordering re-t  is  bad--Bombay         Prohibition  A  1949 (Bern.  XXV Sec. 66(1) r/w   Sec.   378         Criminal Procedure Code (Act 11 of 1974) 1973.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 31  

       Patel Jethabhai Chatur  v. State of Gujarat         ARBITRATION ACT, 1940,   Contract between lay parties not be         thwarted  by  narrow pedal and  legalistic     interpretatic         Intendment  of parties regarding  validity  of  arbitraror’s         appointment, whether material.         Union of India v. M/s D.M. R. &Co  ....         ATTESTING WITNESS         [See Succession Act]         BENAMI TRAINSACTION--Pr of Benami nature.         Union of India v. Moksh Buil and Financiers and Ors.     ..         BIHAR AND  ORISSA EXC ACT, 1951 as  amended Amending Acts of         1970 and 1 --Ss. 22 and 29--Power of State         2             to auction exclusive privilege to vend liquor-Nature  of         payment received.         Lakhan    Lal   etc.   v.   The   State   of   Orissa    and         Ors.           . .811         BIHAR    ELECTRICITY        DUTY  ACT,  1948  (As   amended)         S.3(2)         (e)--Scope of.         Damodar Valley Corporation  v. State of Bihar and Ors.    ..         118             HAR LAND  REFORMS  ACT, 1950--Ss. 4(a) and 10--Lessee of         nines--If  a  tenure-holder  or intermediary under the Act.         Sone  Valley Portland Cement Co. Ltd. v. The General  Mining         Synidicate (P) Ltd.              .. 359         BOMBAY INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1946--S. 98(1)(a)--schedule         III  item  6(ii)--Scope of -Workmen laid off--Lock  out  de-         clared later alleging unruly behaviour--Lockout if illegal.         priya   Laxmi   Mills  Ltd.  v.  Mazdoor   Maharan   Mandal,         Baroda   .. 709         BOMBAY  PROHIBITION   ACT, 949 (Bom. XXV) Sec. 66(1)(b).         [See  Appeal against acquittal]                                        .. 872         BOMBAY  PROVINCIAL MUNICIPAL   CORPORATIONS ACT, As  applied         in Gujarat  (Bom. 59 of 1949), S.284N--Applicability of .5A,         Land Acquirition Act.         Farid  Ahmed Abdul Samad and Anr. v. The Municipal  Corpora-         tion      of     the     City     of     Ahmedabad       and         Anr.                       .. 71         BOMBAY RENT,  HOTEL  AND LODGING  HOUSE  RATES ACT, 1947         Sub. Section 13(1)(B)--Suit    for eviction on the grond  of         bonafide and personal need of a landlord --Whether right  to         sue  survives to  his  heirs--Requirement  of firm in  which         landlord   is  a partner  whether  his  requirement--Whether         decree passed in favour of landlord can be disturbed on  his         death.         Shantilal Thakordas and Ors. v. Chimanlal Maganlal Telwala                                            .. 341         2.  Sec.  15A--Sec.  5(4A)--Indian Easements Act  1882--Sec.         52-62(c)--Revocation of licence by efflux of time--Presiden-         cy  Small  Causes  Courts Act  1882--Sec.’  47--Effect    of         filing   of  application for   eviction Meaning  of  licence         under    a   Subsisting    agreement--Interpretation      of         statutes--Practice.         D.H. Manjar & Ors. v. Waman Laxman Kudav            . .403         BOMBAY     VILLAGE    PANCHAYAT  ACT  (BOM.   6   OF   1933)         S.89--’House’ if includes ’building’.         Tata Engineering &  Locomotive Company Ltd. v. Gram Panchay-         at pimpri  Waghere.           .. 306         BURDEN OF         --establishing urgency under the . Land Acquisition Act         [See Land Acquisition Act]  .. 763         CENTRAL       CIVIL    SERVICE (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL  AND         APPEAL)   Rules,  1965-Scope   of--Rules    applicable  only

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 31  

       when  disciplinary proceedings are taken.         Union of India and Anr. v.K.S. Subramanian             .. 87         CENTRAL   SALES TAX   ACT 1956         1. Sec. 2(b) 9--Andhra  Pradesh General Sales Tax Act  1957,         Central  Government  selling foodgrains    and  fertilisers,         whether    a   dealer--Profit motive,  if  relevant--Whether         State carried on business.         Joint Director of Food, Visakapatham  v. The State of Andhra         Pradesh.                     .. 59         3         2.  S. 15(b)--Scope    of--Assessee bought  declared   goods         and  paid  States Sales Tax--Sale by   way   of  inter-state         sale-If entitled to refund of State Sales Tax.         Thiru    Manickam    and    Co.    v.    The    State     of         TamilNadu        . .950         3. (74 of 1956) S. 8(3)(6) and Central Sales Tax (Regulation         and  Turnover) Rules, 1957, r. 13Goods used in the  manufac-         ture or processing of goods for sale --Scope of--Fertilizers         used for growing tea plants, if could be included  in  goods         used in the manufacture of tea for sale.         Travancore  Tea  Estates Co. Ltd. v. State  of  Karnataka  &         Ors... 755         4. (74 of 1956) S.9(1),  proviso-Scope of.         M/s  Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. (Coal Sales) Ltd. v. State         of Uttar Pradesh and Ant.   .. 25         CHARGE--Fresh  charge  on appreciation of  evidence  can  be         ordered  to be framed by the High Court in exercise  of  its         appellate  jurisdiction--Criminal      Procedure Code  (Act.         II  of 1974),  1973 Secs. 386(a),  464(I)  and 462(2)(a).         Patel Jethabhai Chatur v. State of Gujarat         .. 872         CITY OF BANGALORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION SERVICES   (GENERAL)         CADRE AND RECRUITMENT REGULATIONS 1971, Reg. 3’Absorption of         Senior  Health Inspectors by Corporation contrary to  provi-         sions in Reg. 3--Effect of.         C.   Muniyappa   Naidu  etc.  v.  State   of   Karnataka   &         Ors.       . .791         CITY  OF  MYSORE  IMPROVEMENT  ACT, 1903,  Ss.  16,  18  and         33(1)--Relevant   date  for determining market   value   for         purposes of compensation, what is.         Special  Land  Acquisition Officer City  Improvement   Trust         Board, Mysore v.P. Govindan.     .. 549         CIVIL SERVICE         1.  Powers of relaxation--Whether rules can be  made  retro-         spectively  --Andhra Pradesh  State and Subordinate    Serv-         ices    Rules 1962--Rule 47--Andhra Pradesh Civil’  Services         (Co-operation Branch)         Government  of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. v. Sri D.  Janardhana         Rao and Anr.                 .. 702         2.   Seniority--Irregular        recruitment-Regularisation-         Appointments through Public Service  Commission--Recruitment         through  centralised  recruitment scheme.         P.C.   Patel   and   Ors.   v.   Smt.   T.H.   Pathak    and         Ors.          .. 677         CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE         1.  S.I 1  Res  Judicata,  whether invocable in   subsequent         stage of same proceedings.         Y.B. Patel and Ors. v. Y. L. patil .. 320         2.  Ss.  79 and 80, suit for  compensation  against  railway         administration  whether  impleading  Union of India    as  a         party  necessary.         State   of  Kerala  v.  The   General   Manager,    Southern         Railway Madras.                 .. 419         3. S.80  Whether  applicable  to suits filed under s.9(1) of         the (M.P.)  Public  Trusts  Act, 1951.         State of Maharashtra & Anr. v. Shri Chartder Kant  .. 993

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 31  

       4.  S.115--Jurisdiction  of  High Court  to  interfere  with         the Trial   Court’s  discretionary order, when exercisable.         4           M/s  Mechelec  Engineers  & Manu facturers  v.  M/s  Basic         Equipment Corporation.              .. 1060         5.   (Act  5  of  1908)  Order  VI  r/w  Order,  XIV,   rule         1(5)--Courts should not allow parties to go to trial in  the         absence of proper pleadings.         Union of India v. Sita Ram Jaiswal .. 979         6. (Act  v  of 1908)  Order  V], Rule 17.         [See Pleadings]         .. 728         7.   Act  V  of  1908--   Section   11  Principle   of   res         judicata--Applicability  when  gratuity  was  awarded  in  a         previous proceedings under the Payment of Wages Act i.n  the         teeth  of  the clear provision of Rule 8.01--Scope  of  Rule         8.01.         Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport  Corporation   Hyderabad         v. Venkateswara Rao etc. ..... 248         CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1908         1.  Whether Magistrate has jurisdiction to recall  dismissal         order  made  u/s 203--Application  for  recalling  dismissal         order, whether amounts to  fresh complaint.         Bindeshwari Prasad Singh v.  Kali Singh        .. 125         2.  S.99   A--Scope of  --Whether ’Statement of  grounds’  a         mandatory provision.         State of Uttar Pradesh v. Lalai Singh Yadav            ..616         3. (Act 2 of 1974)Ss. 235 and 465  Scope of.         Santa Singh v. The State of Punjab                                       ..229         4.  (Act II of 1974), 1973 S. 378. [See Appeal  against  ac-         quittal]      .. 872         5.  (Act 2 of  1974)--S.494 Prosecution applying  for  with-         drawal  of  prosecution--Principles  to  be   considered  by         Court  in granting consent.         State of Orissa v.  Chandrika Mohapalra & Ors.       .. 335         COMPULSORY RETIREMENT--         Compulsory   retirement  made in public interest  under  the         Government of lndia  Decision No.  23 dated   30th  November         1962 below   Fundamental  Rule  56 (later  substituted as  a         new  rule  FR  56(i)--Mere  reference  to  a  non-subsisting         rule  does  not invalidate the order when retirement is   in         public  interest and bona fide.         Mayconghoan     Rahamohan     ,Singh    v.     The     Chief         Commissioner(Administration)    Manipur  and Ors.   ..1022         2. [see  Constitution  of India] ..128         CONDONATION OF DELAY         --in  applying for renewal of stage permits under the  Motor         Vehicles Act.         [See Motor Vehicles Act]  .. 503         CONDUCT    OF   ELECTION RULES 1961, rr. 42 and 56(6)-.         Tendered ballot paper, what is and use of.         Dr.  Wilfred D’Souza v. Francis Menino Jesus Ferrao   .. 942         CONSTITUTION OF INDIA         1.  Art.  14---Combines Seniority Scheme introduced  by  the         Reserve Bank of India to equalise opportunities of confirma-         tion  and  pro-motion of Clerks--Some  Clerks  affected  ad-         versely by unforseen circumstances--if   violative  of equal         opportunity  clause--Right of State to integrate Cadres  and         lay down principles of seniority..         Reserve   Bank   of  India  &  Ors.  v.N.   C.   Paliwal   &         Ors.         .. 377         5         2.  Arts.  14, 16--Civil   Service---Seniority--Direct   Re-         cruits and promotees--Quota--Whether roster  implicit--Bene-         fit   of   service-Words    and    Phrases    "As   far   as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 31  

       practicable."         N.K. Chauhan and Ors. v. State of Gujarat and Ors.   .. 1037         3. Art. 15(4)--Reservation of seats for  socially and educa-         tionally      backward      classes      in      educational         institutions--Annual     family income test---if valid.         Kumari  K.S.  Jayasree and Anr. v. The State of  Kerala  and         Anr.         .. 194         4. Art. 19(6)(ii) and 269(g):         [See Central Sales Tax Act] .. 59         5. Art. 3IA(1)  Second Proviso-Art.  31(b)--Meaning of right         conferred--9th       Schedule-Whether different ceiling  can         be  imposed for different persons-Whether  second    proviso         to  Art.  31(A)(1)   imposed a  feter  on  the   legislative         competence  --Gujarat  Agricultural   Land   Ceiling     Act         1961 (Gujarat Act 27    of 1961)--Section  2 (21), 6.         Hasmukhlal  Dahayabhai  and  Ors.  v.  State  of  Gujarat  &         Ors.  .. 103         6. Art.  131--Disputes   between State and Union --Jurisdic-         tion of High Court--Charge of Excise  Duty-- Condition   of-         Whether   an  article  manufactured or produced  before  the         levy is imposed is excisable.          Union of India v. State of Mysore .. 842         7.  Art.-- 136  Practice and Procedure-Whether  a  Court  of         Criminal  Appeal--Whether  can  interfere   with  concurrent         findings  of fact--Interference when grave  and  substantial         injustice.         Dalbir Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab             . .280         8.  Art.  226--High  Court--if could  interefere   with  the         Appellate  orders  of Income Tax  Appellate  Tribunal  under         Art.  226.         Income  Tax Officer, Lucknow v. M/s S.B. Singbar  Singh  and         Sons and Anr.                  . .214         9.  Art.  226--When     alternative  remedies     available,         whether writ  petition maintainable.         G.     Sarana     v.    University    of     Lucknow     and         Ors.                   .. 64         10.  Art. 226, whether  concurrent findings of facts by  the         Revenue Authorities, can be reopened in writ petition.         Y.B. Patel and Ors.  v.  Y. L. Patil                  .. 32         11.  Art.   235--Disciplinary   action  over     subordinate         judiciary-Governor--If   bound by the recommendation of  the         High Court--Consultation with State Public  Service  Commis-         sion-If warranted by Art. 235.         Baldev  Raj  Guliani and Ors. v. The Punjab &  Haryana  High         Court and Ors.                 ..425         12. Art. 288(2)--Scope of.         Damodar Valley  Corporation v. State of Bihar and Ors.    ..         118         13.  Arts.  309, 310 and 311---Scope of Art. 310   Visa  Vis         Arts. 309 and 311.         Union of India and Anr. v. K. S. Subramanian           .. 87         14.   Art.  311--Termination   of  services   of   temporary         servant-Protection of Article when applicable.         State of U. P. v.  Ram Chandra Trivedi            .. 462         15.  Art.  311(2),  violation    of --Penalty of  compulsory         retirement-Hyderabad Civil Service (Classification,  Control         and Appeal Rules,) reasonable opportunity of defence at  the         stages of enquiry  and punishment--         6         Consideration  of  extraneous matters in  recommendation  of         penalty by High Court Chief Justice, whether valid.         State  of Andhra Pradesh v. S.N. Nizamuddin Ali Khan      ..         128         CONTEMPT  OF COURT ACT (ACT NO. 70 OF 1971) Ss. 2(b) 10  and         12(1)  read  with  Article 215,    Constitution   of  India-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 19 of 31  

       Remitting the punishment awarded after accepting the  apolo-         gy,  tendered by the contemnor and ordering him to  pay  the         cost  of paper  books,  whether  valid-Whether endorsing  to         the  Registrar a copy of the wireless message, addressed  to         the State  Counsel for information only amounts to contempt.         Arun  Kshetrapal   v.   Registrar, High  Court,  Jabalpur  &         Anr... 98         2.  1971, S.19(1)(b)--Finding  of committal of  contempt  is         basis of acceptance of apology--Judge exposing   himself  to         public controversy  cannot shelter behind his office.         Ram   Pratap   Sharma   and   Ors.   v.   Daya   Nand    and         Ors.       . .242         CONTRACT OF SALE OF GOODS             --Whether interstate or intra state Sale.         [See sale]              .. 631         CORRUPT PRACTICE:         [See Election]          . .490         COSTS:              tax matters when there is conflict among High Courts.         [See Practice]         .. 9         CUSTOMS  ACT,  1962,   Ss.  28, 131(1)(3) and (5):         [See Limitation]       . .983         DEALER:         ----Whether Central Government selling foodgrains and ferti-         lizers a dealer.         [See Central Sales Tax Act, 1956] . .59         DELEGATION OF POWERS TO OFFICERS for execution of  contracts         under  s.122(1) of Jammu & Kashmir Constitution--  Contracts         containing arbitration clause validity executed on behalf of         the Government cannot be questioned on the plea of violation         of s. 122(1.).         Timber  Kashmir  (P) Ltd. etc. v.  Conservator  of  Forests,         Jammu and Ors.                       .. 937         DEVELOPMENT REBATE         --Whether   dividend     when withdrawn.         [See Income Tax Act]     .. 638         DIRECTORATE   GENERAL  OF TECHNICAL  DEVELOPMENT  (CLASS  II         POSTS) RECRUITMENT (AMENDMENT) RULES, --1974, Rule 2, inter-         pretation of --whether officer on special duty  in the  same         grade as Development Officers.         S. Ramaswamy v. Union of India and Ors.           .. 221         DISCIPLINARY ACTION :         ---Over subordinate judiciary by High  Court.         [See Constitution of India]   . .425         DISMISSAL    ORDER, recall of         [See Code of Criminal Procedure]                                             .. 125         DOCTRINE  OF WAIVER--Bar of waiver,  whether  applicable  to         later grievance against ’bias.’         G.     Sarana     v.    University    of     Lucknow     and         Ors.                   . .64         ELECTION--Representation  of  the  People  Act,   1951--Sec.         123(2)--Sec.   100(1)(b)--Corrupt practice --Undue    influ-         ence--Conduct  of Election Rules 1961--Rules 39(2)  --Ballot         paper  containing mark on the reverse of the symbol--         7         Can be  rejected as  invalid-Charge of Corrupt  practice--If         of  quasi criminal nature--Degree  of  proof----Interference         with appreciation of evidence by High Court --Whether  elec-         tion result can be lightly interfered with.         M. Narayana Rao v.G. Venkata Reddy & Ors.             ..490          ELECTRICITY  ACT  1910 Section 22B--Electricity Supply Act.         1948--Sections  18,  49  and 79(j)  --Whether   section   49         invalid for excessive delegation--Whether Electricity  Board         can reduce the quota of consumption if the State  Government

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 31  

       has  done so--Board having determined   the  quota,  whether         can further reduce it-Whether Board can fix the quota  with-         out  framing  regulations--Practice  and  Procedure--Whether         appellant  can be allowed to raise a new question  of  facts         for the first time.         Adoni  Cotton Mills  etc. etc. v. The Andhra  Pradesh  State         Electricity Board and Ors.        . .133         EMPLOYEES’   STATE  INSURANCE ACT, 1948--Sec. 61--If  debars         grant  of sick leave--If the Act deals with all  aspects  of         sickness.         The  Alembic  Glass Industries Ltd. Baroda and Ors.  v.  The         Workmen and Ors.                   .. 80         ESCAPED ASSESSMENT         [See Income Tax ]         .. 207         ESTATE DUTY ACT (34 of 1953)         1. Ss. 2(15), 9 and 27--Scope of.         Controller of Estate Duty, Gujarat v. Shri Kantilal  Trikam-         lal   . .9         2.  S.5--Land  covered   with  wild.  and   natural   forest         growths--of agricultural land.         Controller  of Estate Duty, Kerala v   V. Venugopala   Verma         Rajah       .. 346         3.  S.10--Gift   of property the deemed to be  part  of  the         State of deceased-doner.         Controller  of Estate Duty, Keral v. M/s  R.V.  Vishwanathan         and Ors. .. 64         EVIDENCE ACT (1 of 1872)         1. Ss. 17  and  33--Evidence of admission--Admissibility.         Union   of  India  v.  Moksh  Builder  and  Financiers   and         Ors.    .. 96         2. S.43 and Code of Civil Procedure (Act 5 of 1908) 0.41  r.         2 Admission  of  Judgments  in land acquisition  preceedings         an additional evidence.         The Land Acquisition Officer, City  Improvement Trust  Board         v. H. Narayaniah etc. etc.         3. S.68--Discharge of onusproban by propounder-when  execut-         ic of will surrounded by suspicious circumstances.         Seth  Beni  Chand (since dead) no by 1. rs.  v.  Smt.  Kamla         Kunwar and Ors.                 .. 57         4. See. 116--Whether tenant cadeny the landlord’s title.         Sri Ram Pasricha  v. Jagannat and Ors.         FINAL LIST, when may be set asid by Court.         Union of India v. Dr. R.D. Nanjia and Ors.         FINDINGS OF FACT         [See Constitution of India] .. 32         FIRST   INFORMATION      REPORT--delay in lodging.         [See Penal Code]         .. 280         FUNDAMENTAL RULE 56(j):         [See   Compulsory retirement]         .. 1025         GENERAL CLAUSES ACT 189’ --Section  3(42) Meaning   of  per-         son--Whether legislatur         8         bound to follow definition in General Clauses Act.          Hasmukhalal Dayabhai and Ors. v. State of Gujarat and  Ors.         etc. .. 103         OLD  CONTROL  RULES, 1963,         whether includes smuggled gold within their ambit.         Triveni Prasad Ramkaran Verma State of Maharashtra    .. 519         GRATUITY,     entitlement to-whether a former employee of he         Nizam’s  State  Railway can claim gratuity aS  of  right  in         addition   to  provident  Fund--Government   of    Hyderabad         Railway  establishment  Code, 1949, Rule . 01,  8.02,  8.05,         8.12,   8.13,  .15, 8.16, 8.17 and 8.19 read with   para  17         Chapter   VII-interpretation of.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 21 of 31  

       Andhra Pradesh State .Road Transport Corporation,  Hyderabad         v.  Venkateswara .Rao. etc.  . .248         GUJARAT    MUNICIPALITIES               1963,  S.  38 (10)(b)(i)  "act  as  Councillor"--ScoPe         of--President  of  the  Municipality applying  or  lease  of         land--If  debarred   taking land on lease--General power  of         supervision conferred  on the  President--If resident should         be  deemed to have acted within the meaning  of  38(1)(b)(i)         when   lease was ranted to him by the Chief officer.         Rustamji  Nasorvanji  Danger v. shri Joram Kunverji  Ganatra         and Ors.                     .. 884         HINDU LAW         If  a co-widow can relinquish ght  of  survivorship--Whether         after  relinquishment,   a widow an dispose of  property  by         will.         Rindumati Bai v. Nrarbada’ Prasad . .988         RELIGIOUS  ENDOWMENT-Hindu  temple forming part  of  a  Jain         Institution--When may be treated as a Hindu religious endow-         ment.         Commissioner    of Hindu Religious  & Charitable  Endowments         Mysore   v.   Sri  Ratnavaram  Heggde   (deceased)   by   1.         rs.        . .889         IDENTIFICATION PARADE:         [See Penal Code]          .. 280         INCOME TAX ACT 1922         1.  S.2.(4)--When  can  single and isolated sale be a  busi-         ness transaction within the meaning of -Onus probandi on the         Taxation  Department--Initial   purchase with  intention  of         advantageous sale--Earning profit on delivery of goods   not         necessary.         Dalmia Cement Ltd., v. The  Commissioner of Income Tax,  New         Delhi.            .. 5 54         2. (11 of 1922) Ss. 2 (6A)(e)’and 10(2)   (vi-b)-Development         rebate   treated  as   accumulated  profits--Withdrawal   of         amount by shareholder from Company’s account--if  withdrawal         can be treated as dividend since amount withdrawn is  within         accumulated profits.         P.K.   Badiani   v.   The  Commissioner   of   Income   Tax,         Bombay   . .638         3.  S.9--Irrevocable rent--If could be deducted from  income         from property of only one  year-Exemption--If could be given         only once.         Commissioner  of  Income Tax, Lucknow v. Shri  Madho  Parsad         Jatia.                   .. 202         4. Sec.  23A(1)--Explanation 2(1) to Sec. 23A(1)--Meaning of         investment  Companies, whether restricted to  shares  stocks         and  other  securities or used  in  contradistinction   with         manufacturing  processing  and  trading   operations--Indian         Companies         9         Act 1913--Sec.  87(f)--Companies Act 1956--Sec. 372(11).         Nawn Estates (P) Ltd. v. C.I.T., West Bengal     .. 798         5.  Ss.  23A  and  35(1)--Whether income  tax   officer  has         power  under  s. 35(1) to rectify an order passed  under  s.         23A.         Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur. v. M/s. J.K.  Commercial         Corporation Ltd. etc.  .. 512         6.  Sec. 25A(3)--Claims for partition and disruption of  the         Hindu  Undivided family disallowed by  I.T.O.--Appeal  under         the   Act  filed against the orders  of.I.T.O.  also    dis-         missed--No  reference under the Act challenging  the  Tribu-         nal’s  order  dismissing the appeal was  taken,  but  subse-         quentiy got a preliminary decree for partition passed by the         civil court during the pendency of the apPeal--Whether t  he         Income  Tax Authorities  are bound by the subsequent  parti-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 22 of 31  

       tion decree of the civil court.         Narendra kumar J. Madi v. Commissioner of Income Tax,  Guja-         rat 11, Ahmedabad           .. 112         7.  Ss. 34  and 42, Income Tax Act (43 of 1961) s.  147  and         Income Tax Rules, 1922, r. 33 corresponding to r. 10 of 1962         Rules--One  0 f t he met hods mentioned in corresponding  to         r.  10 of 1962  Rules--One  of  the methods mentioned in  r.         33  applied for assessment--Higher tax liability if  another         method  in rule adopted--If a case  of income  escaping  as-         sessment.         Commissioner  of  Income Tax, West Bengal-  1,  Calcutta  v.         Simon Carves Ltd.              .. 207         8.  S. 5(2)-Non-resident  company receiving  income  outside         India-Income if accrued in India.         84SCI/77         The  Performing Right Socio)Ltd. & Anr. v. The  Commr.Income         Tax and Ors.     .. 1         INDUSTRIAL    DISPUTES   A(  1907--Sec.   2(00)-Meaning   of         trenchment--Can termination service by efflux of time  cover         by the expression retrenchment         Hindustan  Steel  Ltd. v. The p  siding   Officer,   Labour.         Court Orissa and Ors.            .. 6         2.  Sec.  36--When legal practioners can appear  before  the         Tribunal--Whether Secs.  36(1) an 36(2) is controlled by  s.         ’36(4)         Pradip Port  Trust,  Pradip Their Workmen          .. 5         INTER-STATE  SENIORITY         [See State’s Reorganisation Act]                                       . .82         INTERPRETATION         1.  Amendment   of  a section--could be  used  to  interpret         earlier provision in the Act.         Sone   Valley  Portland  Cem Co. Ltd. v.  The  General  Mini         Syndicate (P) Ltd.        .. 3         2.  "Refund  meaning of--Subsequent amendment of Section  If         could. be used to  interpr earlier ambiguous provision.         Thiru Manickam & Co. v. Sic of Tamil Nadu           .. 9         3.  "should"  contained in a clause "should"   possesses   a         post graduate degree and requist experience whether mandato-         ry or  directory--"Post-gradual Meaning of.         Smt.   Juthika  Bhattacharya The State of  Madhya  prad  and         Ors.                .. 4         4. Contract-of.         [See Arbitration Act]         INTERPRETATION  OF DOCUMENTS--Principles   application         10         to interpretation of document-Notifications Nos.   F. 9/5/59         R & S published in gazette dt. 17-1-60 u/s 507 of the  Delhi         Municipal  Corporation  Act, 1957 (66 of 1957) and Notifica-         tion GSR 486 u/s 1(2) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (59 of         1958)    gazetted   on  21-4-62 Whether the whole  of  Mauza         Chowkri  Mubarakbad  and whole of Onkar Nagar  and  Lekhpura         were meant to be notified.         Jangbirv. Mahavir Prasad Gupta ..670         INTERPRETATION   OF   STATUTES         [See  Bombay  Rents/-Hotel and Lodging House  Rates  Control         Act, 1947]               . .403          Estate Duty Act and other taxing statutes--Principles.         Controller of Estate Duty, Gujarat v. Shri Kantilal  Trikam-         lal          Expressions not being terms of art whether to be  construed         in  technical  sense or ordinary popular sense  as  used  by         businessmen    --Legislative    history    as    guide    to         construction--Genesis  and  development  of law  as  key  to         interpretation-Whether  English decisions useful  guides  or

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 23 of 31  

       construction   of    analogous    provisions,    fundamental         concepts   and general principles.         Nawn Estates (P) Ltd. v.C.I.T., West Bengal       .. 798         Provision in Act substituted by another--Amending  provision         avoid- -Effect.         -State of Maharashtra v. The Central Provinces Manganese Ore         Co. Ltd.                .. 1002         Rules as an aid--Use of Statement of objects and reasons.         Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd. v. Gram Panchayat         Pimpri Waghere.          .. 306         6. Statute when retrospective.         K. Eapen Chacko v. The Provident Investment Co. P. Ltd.   ..         1026         7. When a statute could be read retrospectively.         State of Kerala v. philomina etc. & Ors.                  ..         273         JAMMU & KASHMIR CONSTITUTION, S. 122         [See Delegation of Powers] .. 937         JUDGMENTS         Admission of judgments in  Land Acquisition proceedings.         [See Land Acquisition]     .. 178         JURISDICTION         1.  --of  High Courts to interfere with  the  trial  Court’s         discretionary order.         [See C.P.C.]             .. 1061         2. of High Court under  Art. 226 to interfere with orders of         the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.         [See Constitution of India ] .. 214         KARNATAKA  LAND REFORMS ACT, 1961, Ss. 107  and  133’Whether         applicable  to  land  unauthorisedly held  after  expiry  of         lease.         Corporation    of    the   City    of    Bangalore    v.B.T.         Kampanna     . .269         KARNATAKA RECRUITMENT OF GAZETTED PROBATIONERS (Class I  and         11  Posts  appointment by  competitive  examination)  Rules,         1966--R.   9  read  with  Part  IV  of  Schedule   II--Scope         of--Awarding  block marks in interview--If violative of  the         Rule.         State  of Karnataka and Anr. v. M. Farida & Ors.          ..         323         KERALA LAND REFORMS ACT         1.  1963   S. 84  Scope of  interpretation--When  a  statute         could be read retrospectively.         11         State of Kerala and Ors. v. Philomina etc. and Ors.   .. 273         2. 1964 Secs. 81, 83, 84, 85, 85A and 86--Voluntary   trans-         fers made after notified date whether valid.         State of Kerala and Ors. v. K.A. Gangadharan     .. 960         3.  (Kerala  1 of 1964) as amended in 1969 and  1971,  Secs.         3(1), 50A, 52, 73, 108, 125 and 132(3) Scope of.         K. Eapen Chacko v. The Provident Investment  Co. P. Ltd.            .. 1026         LAND ACQUISITION ACT         1.  City of Bangalore Improvement Act, 1945, Ss. 16, 18  and         27--Notification   under   Ss.  16  and  18   on   different         dates--Date  for  determining  market  .value  for  awarding         compensation  for acquisition of land.         The Land Acquisition  Officer, City Improvement Trust, Board         v. 11. Narayaniah etc.     .. 178         2.  Act  1894  Ss. 5A, 6 and  17(4)-Burden  of  establishing         urgency On whom lies.         Narayan  Govind Gayate etc. v. State of  Maharashtra      ..         763         3. (1 of 1894) s.6A--If mandatory- Effect of  non-compliance         in case of beneficial schemes.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 24 of 31  

       Farid Ahmed Abdul Samad and Anr. v. The Municipal Corpn.  of         the City of Ahmedabad and Anr.   . .71         LEGAL ENTITY              [See Railways Act, 1890]   . .419         LIMITATION         1. for  rectification   under  the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948,         S. 22.         [See U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948]                                              . .25.         2.  Period of limitation in respect of suo moto revision  by         Central Government to annul or modify         any  order of erroneous refund of duty when  begins--Customs         Act, 1962, Sec. 28, 131(1)(3)(5) scope of.         Geep  Flashlight  Industries  Ltd.  v.  Union  of  India   &         Ors.   . .983         LIMITATION ACT         1. 1963 Ss. 5 and 29(23)-If applicable.           Mohd. Ashfaq v. State Transport   Appellate  Tribunal M.P.         and  Ors.                .. 563         2.  1963, S.I 2(2) whether applicable to revision  petitions         filed  under section 10, U.P. Sales Tax Act. Time  spent  in         obtaining  second--copy  of.    impugned  order, whether  to         be excluded in computing limitation period for filing  revi-         sion petitions.         Commissioner  of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Madan Lal and  Sons  Ba-         reilly. . .683         MADHYA   pRADESH  MUNICIPAL  CORPORATION    ACT     1956Sec.         138(b)--Madhya   Pradesh  Accommodation  Control   Act  Sec.         7---Must  rental value under the  Municipal  Act follow  the         standard rent under Accommodation Control Act  When premises         let out--When used by owner.         Municipal  Corporation,   Indore,  and Ors.  v.  Smt.  Ratna         Prabha ana Ors.                      .. 1017         MADHYA PRADESH PUBLIC TRUSTS ACT 1951s. 9(1):         [See Code of Civil Procedure]                           ..993         MADRAS  GENERAL SALES TAX ACT 1959, Schedule 11,  items  7(a         and (b)--If ultra vires.         M/s. Guruviah Naidu and Sons etc v. State of T.N. and Anr.         MINES AND MINERALS (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1957--         12         1. State Government reserved certain areas for  exploitation         of  minerals  in  public sector--If had  the  power  to   do         so.--State  Governments--If  could   reject  application  of         private persons.         Amritlal  Nathubhai  Shah and Ors. v.  Union  Government  of         India and Anr  ....  372         2. S.30A--Scope of.         State  of Bihar and Anr. etc. v. Khas  Karampura  Collieries         Ltd. etc.                       .. 157         MINIMUM  WAGES  ACT  1948, Entry 22 Explanation  Part  1  of         Schedule, construction of word includes--Whether  ,potteries         Industry  includes manufacture of Mangalore pattern  roofing         tiles.         The South Gujarat .Roofing Tiles Manufacturers  Associations         and Ant. v. The State of Gujarat and Anr   .. 878         MONOPOLY  OF  BUS  ROUTES-Whether  permitting  the  existing         private  operators  to operate till the date  of  expiry  of         their permits creates a monopoly.         Sarjoo   Prasad   Singh   v.  The   State   of   Bihar   and         Ors.          .. 661         MOTOR VEHICLES ACTS 1939         1.  S.  43(1)--State  Government can  direct  imposition  of         fiscal rates on stage-carriage operators for carrying  mails         as  condition of permit--Ss. 48(3) and 59(3)(c) such  direc-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 25 of 31  

       tions  do  not interfere with quasi  judicial  functions  of         Regional Transport Authority. Special provisions of s. 48(3)         (XV) do not override general provisions of s. 43(1)(d)(1).         Sree Gajana Motor Transport Co. Ltd. v. The State of  Karna-         taka and Ors.                 .. 665         2.  Sec.  47--Rajasthan  Motor  Vehicles  Rules,  1951--Rule         108(c)-Whether  considerations in Sec.47 for grant of  stage         permits to be mentioned in the order.         Ikram Khan v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal   and Ors.               .. 459         3. S.58(2) proviso--Delay in.applying for renewal of  exist-         ing  permit --If could be condoned--Chapter IVA--If  a  self         contained    code    --Renewal    application    under    s.         68F(ID)--Whether s. 57 applicable.          Mohd. Ashfaq v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal U.S. and         Ors.                     .. 563         4. Sec.  68D--Scope of ’Whether there should be a finding on         each and every  separate  objection raised.         Sarjoo  prasad  Singh  v.  The State of Bihar and Ors.    ..         661         MURDER:         --Distinction between S.299 and 300 I.P.C.         [See Penal Code]        .. 601         NECESSARY PARTY:             [See Civil Procedure Code] .. 419         NEW CASE         ---Courts’ Whether can make a         [See Partnership Act]       .. 583         NEW DELHI HOUSE RENT CONTROL ORDER 1939---C1. Standard  rent         of house fixed in 1944--Rateable value enhanced on the basis         of rent received in 1966-Whether rating should be correlated         to actual income.         New    Delhi    Municipal   Committee   v.M.N.    Soi    and         Anr.      . .731         NEW PLEA         [See   Adoni  Cotton  Mills  v. Andhra Pradesh  State  Elec-         tricity Board]              .. 133         NOLLES PROSEQUE:         --Principle to be followed by court (See Criminal  Procedure         Code Act 2 of 1974)           . .335         13         OTHER RIGHTS in Explanation 2 to s. 2(15) meaning of.         Controller of Estate Duty, Gujarat v. Shri Kantilal  Trikam-         lal     .. 9         PARTNERSHIP  ACT 1932 Sec. 69  --Whether  mandatory--Whether         suit  can  be  filed by  unregistered  firm--Dissolution  of         firm--Suit by a ’partner of erstwhile unregistered firm,  If         other partners of erstwhile firm necessary parties --Materi-         al  alterations in a document-Effect of--Suit  for  Specific         and    ascertained    amount-Whether court can make out  new         case and grant partial relief on another basis.         Loonkaran    Setia   etc.  v.  Ivan  E.   Johan   and   Ors.         etc.        .. 853         PENAL CODE--S.34--Specific  evidence for infliction of fatal         wound  not required--Community of intent with  participatory         presence fixes constructive liability.         Harshadsingh @ Baba  Pahalvansingh Thakura   v. The State of         Gujarat                   .. 626         2.  Ss.  299  and 300--Culpable homicide  not  amounting  to         murder and murder--Distinction--Tests to be applied in  each         case--S.300 Thirdly I.P.C.--Scope of.         State of Andhra Pradesh  v. Rayavarapu Punnayya and Anr.         . .601         3. Section  302--Non-examination of eye witnesses--Interest-         ed witnesses--Meaning of--Necessity of examining independent

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 26 of 31  

       witnesses  --Motive--Delay in lodging F/R and  despatch   to         Magistrate-Identification  parade, necessity of.         Dalbir Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab              .. 280         PLEADINGS         1.  Amendments  to--Amendment to the pleadings to  introduce         an  entirely different case, under the guise  of  permisible         inconsistent  pleas  which is likely to cause  prejudice  to         the  other  side cannot be allowed--Civil    Procedure  Code         (Act V of 1908)--Order VI Rule 17.         M/s Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. and Anr. v. M/s         Ladha Ram and Col     . .728         2. Under section 70 of the Contract (Act 9) of  1872--Ingre-         dients necessary to be pleaded.         Union of India v. Sita Ram Jaiswal.                .. 979         POSSESSION   "Possession"    to attract  criminal  liability         must be "conscious possession".         Patel Jethabhai Chatur v. State of Gujarat          .. 872         POWERS  OF OFFICER         to rectify an order passed u/s 23A         [See Income Tax Act]      .. 512         POWER TO AUCTION         --exclusive  privilege to vend liquor [See Bihar and  Orissa         Excise Act.    . .811         PRACTICE         1.  Costs in tax matters when there is conflict  among  High         Courts             Controller  of  Estate Duty, Gujrart  v.  Shri  Kantilal         Trikamalal    ...         2.  Duty of High Court when there is conflict between  deci-         sions  the Supreme Court--Upsetting concurrent  findings  of         fact second appeal-Propriety.         State  of U.P . v. Ram Chandrs  Trivedi                   ..         46:         3.  Duty of High Court where there, is conflict between  the         view expressed by Divisional bench and larger benches of the         Supreme Court.         Union of India  and Anr.  K.S. Subramanian.         14         4. Non-suiting for want of proper pleadings at the appellate         stage  by the Supreme Court when parties went to  trial  and         issues  were  raised  and the litigation  went  through  the         course of trial and appeal is not desirable.         Union of India v. Sita  .Ram Jaiswal                  .. 979         5.  Supreme Court will not entertain a complaint on    facts         and interfere with a finding of facts by the appellate Court         under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.         Patel Jethabhai Chatur v. State of Gujarat           .. 872         PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE         1. Further plea taken in the affidavit rejoinder to the writ         petition  shall not be allowed to be agitate  Sarjoo  Prasad         Singh v. The State of Bihar and Ors.        .. 861         2.  High Court’s duty to give reasons even in cases of  sum-         mary dismissal.         Shankar  Gopinath Apte v. Gangabai Hariharrao Patwardhan  ..         411         3.  Interference with findings  on reliability  of  evidence         only in exceptional circumstances.         4.  Harshadsingh@ Baba pahalvansingh Thakur v. The State  ..         626         5.  Re-appraisal  of evidence by Supreme Court in  spite  of         concurrent  findings  of fact, proper  when  miscarriage  of         justice has occurred.         Mohammad Aslam v. State of Uttar Pradesh           .. 689         Whether High Court can direct a Minister to be impleaded  as         a party and file his  personal affidavit.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 27 of 31  

       State of Punjab ana  Anr. v. Y.P. Duggal and Ors.     .. 96         PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1947 Sec. 5(1)(e) and 5(1)(d)         Sec.  5(2)  Misappropriating Govt. funds.--Retaining   Govt.         Funds by a Govt. Servant--Evidence Act, Sec.  154--When  can         witness  be  declared  hostile--Can evidence  of  a  hostile         witness be accepted--Evidence Act   Sec.--         105--Onus of proving exceptions in IPC on accused--Degree of         proof--Criminal Trial--Effect of non--examination of materi-         al   witness-Conviction   on  evidence   of   a     solitary         witness--Whether  adverse  inference can  be  drawn  against         accused  for not leading evidence--Onus of  prosecution-Pre-         sumption of innocence.         Rabindra       Kumar       Dey       v.       State       of         Orissa                   . .439         PREVENTION OF FOOD ADULTERATION ACT 1910.         1. S. 16-Proviso--Scope of.         Murlidhar    Meghraj   etc.   v.   State   of    Maharashtra         etc.           .. 1         2. sec. 16(1) (a) (2) (1)--2(1) (c) 2(1)  (j)--2(1)  Preven-         tion  of Food Adulteration of Rules.Rules 23,  28 and 29 Can         conviction be based on sole testimony of Food Inspector--Can         an  article fail under clause (j) and (i) of Sec.  2(i)--Are         they mutually exclusive or overlapping-When rules are silent         about  colouring  material can use of  dye  be  punished--Do         provisions  of Probation of Offenders Act apply to  offences         under the Prevention of Food  Adulteration Act.         Prem  Ballab and Anr v.  The State (Delhi Admn.)     .. 592         PRIVITY  OF  CONTRACT         When  a company has severa branches and there is a  contract         between  the buyer and one of the branches, the contract  of         sale is between the company and the buyer.         English  Electric  Company  of India  1Ltd.  v.  The  Deputy         Commercial Tax Officer and Ors.        .. 631         15         PROBATION    OF  OFFENDERS  ACT,   1958--Applicability    to         cases under POFA         [See Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1950]        .. 59         PROCEDURE--When   a  court of appeal can  interfere  in  the         lower court’s Judgment.         Smt. Padma Uppal etc. v. State of Punjab and Ors.   .. 329         PROMOTIONS--Right   to  promotion-Whether promotion of class         III  employees to Class is governed by  "Advance  Correction         Slip No. 7)" introducing w.e. f. March, 11, 1973, new  rules         324 to 328 and substituting a new rule 301 in Chapter III of         the Indian Railway Establishment   Manual Scope and applica-         bility of Rules 301 and 328 (2) (4) and (5)         S.K. Chandan v. Union of India and Ors.          .. 785         PROPERTY         right to dispose of by will by a widow         [See Hindu Law]         . .988         PROVIDENT FUND--Illegal payment of gratuity in the past will         not affect legal claims to Provident Fund.         Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport  Corporation,  Hyd. v.P.          Venkateswara Rao etc.     ..248         PUNJAB  GENERAL  SALES TAX ACT (Punjab Act 46 of  1948),  S.         11(2)  Notice under--Whether should be issued within a  par-         ticular period.         The  Indian  Aluminium  Ltd. & Anr. v. The Excise and  Taxa-         tion Officer and Anr.           . .716         PUNJAB CIVIL SERVICE RULES,             Vol.  1 Rules  2.49 and 3.10 to 3.16--Junior  Vernacular         Cadre teachers officiating in senior vernacular cadre  enti-         tled to benefit of their substantive post .         State of Punjab and Ors. v, Labh Ram and Ors.        .. 832         RAILWAYS ACT, 1890 S. 3(6), Railway Administration,  whether

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 28 of 31  

       a separate legal entity.         State of Kerala v. The General Manager. S.R. Madras   . .419         RAILWAYS   ESTABLISHMENT CODE--Para--157--Whether the  para-         graph  empowers  the  Railway Board to make  rules  for  the         gazetted Railway servants--Construction of para 157.         S.K.    Chandan    v.    Union    of    India    and    Ors.         785         RAILWAY     ESTABLISHMENT  MANUAL--Whether   Rule  328   (2)         providing  for  the  invalidity of promotions  made  in  the         Diesel  Locomotive  Works from August 1, 1961 to  March  11,         1973 casts an obligation on the Railway Board to recall  all         promotions and to form a fresh panel--Meaning of  "Promotion         made  in  the Diesel Locomotive Works in Rule  328  (2)  and         promotion to the higher grades in Rules 328(4)".         S.K.     Chartdan     v.      Union     of     India     and         Ors.                 . .785         RATEABLE VALUE         (See New Delhi House Rent Control Order)       .. 731         REAPPRAISAL         of Evidence by Supreme Court.         (See Practice and Procedure)       ..689         REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY         See Constitution of India  .. 128         2.  to be heard.         (See State’s Reorganisation Act)                                          . .827         REHABILITATION  ACT,  1954 S. 14(1) (b) "Such cash  balances         --Meaning of.         16         Custodian    of    Evacuee   Property,   v.    Smt.    Rabia         Bai            . .255         REPRESENTATION  OF   THE PEOPLE ACT 1950.          Election  petition--Not accompanied by impugned pamphlet-If         liable to be rejected--Printer-If could be called an  accom-         plice  --Failure to send pamphlet to District Magistrate  as         required  by s. 127  A(2) - If makes the printer  an  accom-         plice.         Thakur Virendra Singh v .  Vimal Kumar           .. 525         See.  15, 21, 22,  23"Preparation and revision of  electoral         roll--Amendment,  transposition  or deletion of  entries  in         electoral  roll--Provision of Sec. 23, if  mandatory--Repre-         sentation   of the People Act,  1951--Every person on  elec-         toral roll whether entitled to vote even if name not brought         in    accordance    with   law--Sec.  100(1)   See.   123(1)         (A)--Bribery --Proof   of--Quasi-criminal in  nature--inter-         ference with appreciation of evidence  by High Court,  Bihar         and Orissa Act, 1922  Sec. 389.         Ramji   Prasad   Singh   v.   Ram   Bilas   Jha   and   four         Ors.         . .741         REPRESENTATION  OF  THE PEOPLE ACT 1951.         S.  9A--Contract    signed  as  President,  Gram   Panchayat         Rejection   of   nomination   paper-If   valid--    Improper         rejection-If courts could give relief under s. 100(1) (c).         Jugal Kishore Patnaik v. Ratnakar         Mohanty   .. 49         Sec.  77    Incurring expenses in excess of  what  is   per-         missible--Interference  by this Court with  appreciation  of         evidence by High Court.         Nangthomban  Ibomeha Singh v. Leisanghem  Chandramoni  Singh         and Ors,                 .. 573         RES JUDICATA.              (See Civil Procedure Code)..320         RETRENCHMENT          --Meaning of         (See industrial  Disputes   Act)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 29 of 31  

                                   .. 586         RETROSPECTIVITY.             service rules.         (See Civil Service)         . .702         REVISION         --suo moto limitation for         (See Limitation)          .. 983          RIGHT  OF  MANAGEMENT  Hindu  Law--Joint   Hindu  Undivided         family--Whether  a junior  member of the family can  act  as         Karta  with  the consent of all the other  members,  if  the         senior member gives up his right.         Narendra Kurnar   J.   Modi v. Commissioner  of  Income  Tax         Gujarat  11.  Ahmedabad   .. 112         RIGHT TO PLEAD           --- by  legal Practitioners before the Labour Tribunal.         (See IndustriaI Disputes Act).. 537         RIGHT  TO  SUE  by  the  heirs (See Bombay Rents  Hotel  and         Lodging House     Rates  Control Act, 1947)        .. 341         RIGHT TO SUE      for    eviction  --by a co-owner.         (See      West     Bengal     Premises     Tenancy      Act,         1956)            . .395         SALE--Contract  for sale of goods, whether inter-State  sale         or  intraState  sale--Ingredients--Central Sales   Tax   Act         --Section 3(a).              English  Electric Company of India Ltd. v.  The  Deputy         Commercial Tax Officer and Ors.        .. 631          SALES    REORGANISATION ACT (37 of 1956) s. 115--          Oppertunity to hear after final inter-state seniority  list         is prepared         17         after  giving  opportunity  to aggrieved  officers  to  make         representation against provisional list--If should be given.         Union    of    India    v.    Dr.    R.D.    Nanjiah     and         Ors.                  .. 827         SALES TAX  --Central Provinces  Bear Sales Tax Act, 1947  s.         2(g) Expln. II--Goods within States at the time of  contract         of sale, mixed up outside state and the mixture sold  ’sale’         if taxable.         State  of  Maharashtra etc. v. Central  Provinces  Manganese         Ore.  Co. Ltd.                  .. 1002         2.  Supply  of crude oil by Oil and Natural  Gas  Commission         from  Assam to refinery of Indian Oil Corporation  in  Bihar         --Supply  under directions of Government at price fixed,  by         Government-If inter-state sale liable to Central Sales Tax.         Oil and Natural Gas Commission v. State of Bihar and  Ors...         364         SECOND APPEAL         1 Disturbance of concurrent finding of fact without  consid-         ering  the  objects of the notification  or  discussing  any         principle of construction of documents which could  indicate         that  a  point of law had really arisen for  a  decision  is         patently   exceeding   the   jurisdiction   of   the    High         Court--Civil  Procedure Code (Act V) 1908, S. 100.           Jangbir v. Mahavir Prasad Gupta .. 670         2. -- Propriety of upsetting concurrent findings in         (See Practice)  -        .. 462         SENIORITY         1. -- Direct recruits of Promotees.         (See Constitution of India)                                            ..1037         2. When recruitment irregular. (See Civil Service)   .. 677         SENIORITY SCHEME         -- Right of State to lay down principles of seniority         (See Constitution of India) .. 377         SENTENCE

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 30 of 31  

       Judicial  Jurisdiction  to   soften the sentence in economic         crimes and food offences.         (See Prevention of Food Adulteration  Act, 1954)          ..         1         SICKNESS BENEFIT         (See       Employees’       State       Insurance       Act,         1948)                 ..80         SOLE WITNESS              --conviction  based on           (See Prevention  of Corruption Act)     .  . .439         SPECIAL RULES  1962--Rule 4.         Government  of  A.P.   and Ors.  v. Shri D.  Janardhana  Rao         Anr.                       .. 702         SUCCESSION  ACT, 1925--Sec. 6" legal will  --Genuineness  of         Suspicious circumstances--Burden of proof--Degree of proof.         Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur and Ors.                   .. 925         2. 1975, S. 63 (c), Attesting witness defined.         Seth  Beni  Chand (Since dead now by 1. rs.  v.  Smt.   Kamh         Kunwar and Ors.         .. 578         SUMMARY DISMISSAL         --Court’s duty to give reasons.         (See Practice and Procedure)                                        . .411         SUSPENDED OFFICER  REINSTATED AND LATER COMPULSORILY RETIRED         --Effect  of--- If order of suspension merge with  order  of         reinstatement.         Baldev  Raj  Guliani and Ors. v. The Punjab &  Haryana  High         Court and Ors,                 ....42         18         SUSPENSION ORDERS              --Whether merges with order of Retirement             (See Suspended Officer)    . .425          TERMINATION         -- of services of temporary servants.         (See Constitution of India)  .. 462         TRANSFER  OF  PROPERTY ACT (4 of 1882)   S.  53A,     Indian         Easements  Act (5 of/882) s. 60(b) and Indian  Contract  Act         (9 of 1872) S. 221--Scope of.         Shankar Gopinath Apte v. Gangs bai Hariharrao Patwardhan  ..         411              U.P.  INTERMEDIATE  EDUCATION  ACT,  1921--Whether  the         basic section of a college is within the scope of.         Commissioner, Lucknow Division and Ors. v. Kumari Prem  Lata         Misra.                    . . 957         U.P. SALES TAX ACT, 1948         S.  3-A, Notification issued under-Rule   for   constructing         words--Whether  carbon paper is taxable as ’Paper’   Whether         ribbon is accessory or part of typewriter.         State  of Uttar Pradesh  v. M/s Kores (India) Ltd.        ..         837         S.  22   Order  of rectification passed within  3  years  of         orginal  order,  but served beyond   3 years--/f  barred  by         limitation.         M/s Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. (Coal Sales ) Ltd. v. State         of U.P. and Anr.          .. 25         U.P. ZAMINDARI  ABOLITION AND    LAND  REFORMS  ACT,         1950,  -- Section 117--         Scope  of--State vests lands  in Gaon Sabha--Suit for eject-         ment--.Goan Sabha did not appeal-State--If had locus standi.         Maharaj   Singh   v.  State  of  Uttar    5.   Pradesh   and         Ors.        .. 1072         UNION AND STATE DISPUTES         (See Constitution of India) .. 842         VOLUNTARY TRANSFERS         (See Kerala Land Reforms Act)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 31 of 31  

                              . .960         WEALTH TAX ACT (27 of 1957)         S.2(e)(i) --Agricultural Lands,         What are--Tests for determining.         Commissioner  of  Wealth  Tax, A.P. v.  Officer  in   charge         (Court of Wards ) Paigah.        .. 146         WEST   BENGAL  PREMISES  TENANCY  ACT  1956--   Sec.   13(1)         (f)--Whether one of the co-owners can file suit for eviction         without  impleading   other  co-owners-Whether  a  co-owner,         an-owner  for  the purpose of an  eviction  suit--Stage  for         raising objection about frame of suit.         Sri Ram Pasricha v. Jagannath and Ors.             .. 395         WILL         -- genuineness of legal will degree of proof.             (See Succession Act, 1925)  .. 925         WORDS AND PHRASES         1.  "As far as Practicable"             (See Constitution of India)      ....1037         2.  "House, if it concludes buildings".         (See Bombay Village Panchayat Act)            .. 306         3.   "Other rights" in Explanation     2 to S. 2(15) of  the         Estates  Duty Act, meaning of.          (See "Other rights")    .. 9         4.   "Out of the funds in his possession"  and  "such   cash         balances".  Meaning of         Custodian    of    Evacuee    Property   v.    Smt.    Rabia         Bai       . .255         5. -- See "Person"  meaning of General Clauses Act) .. 103         19         6.      "Post      graduate"       Meaning      of      (See         Interpretation)      . .477         7. "restoration" in Section 70 of the Contract Act,  meaning         of.         union of India v. Sita Barn Jaiswal                  .. 979         8. "Substituted" meaning of.         State   of  Maharashtra  etc.  v.  The   General   Provinces         Manganese Ore. Co. Ltd.     .. 1002         9. -- Vest--Persons  aggrieved-Appurtenance meaning of.         Maharaj Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.   .. 1072         WRIT  JURISDICTION  -- High Court cannot  interfere  with  a         finding .of fact based upon relevant circumstances and  when         it  is not shown to be perverse--The Constitution of  India,         Article 226.         Khazan Singh Ors.  v.  Hukan Singh and Ors.         .. 636         WRIT JURISDICTION  OF THE HIGH COURT--Scope for interference         with findings of depart. mental authorities.         Mis Khushiram Behari Lal and Co.  v. The Assessing Authority         Sangrur Anr.             .. 752         M-- 184 SCI/77--2500- -9-8-77--GIPF.                                         1         1