LexSHRI DURGA PRASAD & ANOTHER versus THE BANARAS BANK LIMITED
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
•. 1 $.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 475 Union to acquire the lands owned by the State, inclu- ding coal mines and coa bearing lands, is u.ltra virea. I find on issues l, 2 and 3 against the defendant, In view of my findings on the said issue, I do not pro- pose to express my opinion on the additional issue. In the result, there will be a decree in favour of the plaintiff in terms of els. (a), (c) and (d) of paragraph 11 of the plaint. The plaintiff is entitled to costs. Br COURT: In view of the judgment of the majority, the suit stands dismissed with costs. Appeal dismissed. SHRI DURGA PRASAD & ANOTHER v. THE BANARAS BANK LIMITED (B. P. SINHA, C.J.,, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. N. WANCHOO, K. C. DAs GUPTA and J.C. SHAH, JJ.) S1<preme Court, ApptUatejuri$4iction of-Cerlifirme graxt"'1. by High Court, if 0011tpetent-•Oourt immtdiately btlow'- Meaning of-Constitution of India,, A.rt. 133 (1). The Official Liquidator of the respondent Bank advertised for sale, the two houses belonging to the Bank. These houses were sold to the second appellant with the sanction of the court. The second appellant thereafter transferred the houses to the first appellant reciting in the deed that the latter was the real owner and that the sale deed from the Official Liquidator was obtained btnami for him. The Official Liquidator moved the High Court at Allahabad foe an order declaring the sale null.and void and for an.order re-transferring the houses to the Bank, A /962 S1at1 of Wist B,.,111 v. Uni .. of lit& Subh&., J. 196• D.....W,11. 1961 476 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1964] VOL. single Judge of the High Court held that the fint appellant being at the material time a member of the committee of inspec- tion and he having suppressed that intercot wu pttcluded from buying the property of the Bank and directed the first appellant lo convey the hou~ to the Official Liquidator of the Bank. This order was confirmed by a Division Bench of the High Court in appeal under cl. JO of the Letters Patent. The High Court then certified the case under Art. 133 (1) (a) or the Constitution for appeal to this Court. It was urged at the he:rrin~ of the appeal on behalf of :he Official Liquidator that the appeal was incompe1cnt, for the High Court had no jurisdiction to grant. the certificate under .\rt. 133 (1) (a) of the Constitution with- out certifying that the appeal involved some substantial ques- tion of law. H.ld,. that under Art. 133 (I) of the Constitution the expression 'Court immediately below' has not the same conno- tation as the aprcooion •Court subordinate to the High Court' and as the judgment of the Single Judge was affirmed in appeal, the appeal to the Supreme Court could not be entertained with a certificate under Art. 133 (1) (a) unless it w.u certified that it involves some substantial question of law. Dwki N,.tuin.,. v. 81ak of U. P., A. I. R. 1959 All. 10, revcraed. Tool8ay PtrarJud Bhu&t v. BtMyei< Mi .. er (1896) L. R. 23 I.A. 102, Prol>liatDatiK1,,.tDar v. Pan""'l Lodl&a, (1941) +s Cal. W. N. I 002, referred to. La4li Pr<H<Jd J~ v. Tlat Karl!.IJl !Mtil/ery Co. [1964) Vol. 1 S. C.R. 270, relied on. I CIVIL APPBLLATE JumsorarroN: Civil Appeal No. 569of1960. Appeal from the judgment and decree dated September 9, 1958, of the Allahabad High Court in· Special Appeal No. 214of1956 • . Ranganadham Chetty, A. V. Rongam, A. Veda- valli and M. I. Khowaja. for the appellants. G. 8. Pathak and G. O. Mathur; for the respon- dent. 1 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 477 1962. December 21. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHAH, J.-The Banaras Bank Ltd-hereinafter called 'the Bank' was directed to be wound up by order of the Allahabad High Court. A committee of inspection was appointed under s. 178-A of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 to act with the Official Liquidator, and one of the members of the Com- mittee was Durga Prasad the first appellant in this appeal. The Official Liquidator ad vertlsed for sale two houses which formed part of the assets of r he Bank. Roshan Lal the ·second appellant made an offer to purchase the two hou~es for Rs. 18,000/-. . This offer was accepted by the Official Liquidator and with the sanction of the Court the two houses were sold to Roshan Lal on August 2, 1941. Roshan Lal thereafter transferred the houses to Durga .Prasad reciting in the deed that the latter was "the real owner" oft he houses and that the sale deed from
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.