Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.02 seconds)

Haji Rahim Bux And Sons And Ors. vs Firm Samiullah And Sons on 18 December, 1962

In yet another case of the Allahabad High Court reported in Haji Rahim Bux & Sons and Ors. v. Firm Samiullah & Sons(2) a division bench consisting of Cheif Justice Desai and Mr. Justice S. D. Singh interpreted the words of 0. 21, r. 90, by saying that the word 'entertain' meant not"receive' or 'accept' but 'proceed to consider on merits' or 'adjudicate upon'. In our opinion these cases have taken a correct view of the word 'entertain' which according to dictionary also means 'admit to consideration'. It would therefore appear that the direction to the court in the proviso to s. 9 is that the court shall not proceed to admit to consideration an appeal which is not accompanied by satisfactory proof of the payment of the admitted tax. This will be when the case is taken up by the court for, the first time. In the decision on which the Assistant Commissioner relied, the learned Chief Justice (Desai C.J.) holds that the words 'accompanied by' showed that something tangible had to accompany the memorandum of appeal. If the memorandum of appeal had to be accompanied by satisfactory proof, it had to be in the shape of something tangible, because no intangible thing can accompany a document like the memorandum of appeal. In our opinion, making 'an appeal' the equivalent of the memorandum of appeal is not sound. Even under 0. 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure. the expressions "appeal" and "memorandum of appeal" are used to denote two distinct things. In Wharton's Law Lexicon, the word "appeal" is defined as the judicial examination of the decisions by a hi-her Court of the decision of an inferior court. The appeal is the judicial examination; the memorandum of appeal contains the rounds on which the judicial examination is invited. (1) A.I.R. 1961 All. 42.
Allahabad High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 43 - Full Document

Swastika Tannery Of Jajmau vs Commissioner Of Sales Tax on 12 March, 1963

case for the assessee to have gone to the -court-, of revision which was bound by the ruling of :the Allahabad High, Court reported in Swastika Tannery of Jaimau v Commissioner of . Sales-tax U.P. Lucknow (1') and' it would have been equally futile to, have. gone to the High Court; on a reference. The matter was more easily disposed of by giving special leave in this Court and we therefore felt that this was one of those extraordinary cases, in which the ends of justice would be better served, by avoiding a circuity of action and by dealing with this matter in this Court directly. It is for this reason that we granted special leave to appeal. The appeal shall therefore be allowed and the appeal shall be remitted to the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) 1, Sales Tax, Kanpur Range, Kanpur, for disposal in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1   2 Next