FOR INTERVENERS T. Desai and M. N. Shroff for the State of Gujarat.
Soli J. Sorabjee Addl.
S. Nariman, Lalit Bhasin, M. N. Karkhanis, Mrs. S. Bhandare and Miss Malini Poduval for the Opposite side.
Application for Review of this Courts Judgment dated 7 9 1978 In the matter of Civil Appeal Nos.
General and M. N. Shroff for the State of Maharashtra.
Badridas Sharma for the State of Rajasthan.
S. Chitale for Hotel Restaurant Association Calcutta and Eastern Region.
C. Bhandare for the Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations, of India.
Sudhakaran for Hotel and Restaurant Association, Ernakulam.
Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, the learned Additional Solicitor General, who has been briefed by the respondent to appear at this stage in the case has, with his usual thoroughness and ability, succeeded in putting together a mass of legal material which we greatly wish had been before the Court when the appeals were originally heard.
Soli J. Sorabjee Addl.
V. S. N. Chari and M. S. Ganesh for the State of Andhra Pradesh.
C. Manchanda and O. P. Rana for the State of U.P. J. Francis for the State of Kerala.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Review Petition Nos.
Nettar for the State of Karnataka.
Anil Diwan, Ravinder Narain and Sri Narain from Walcom Hotels and Indovilles Hotel Division.
and G. S. Chatterjee for the State of West Bengal.
V. Rangam for the State of Tamil Nadu.
was delivered by Pathak, J. Krishna Iyer, J. gave a separate Opinion.
Supporting companysiderations included the circumstance that the furniture and furnishings, linen, crockery and cutlery were provided, and there was also music, dancing and perhaps a floor show.
1768 69 of 1972.
and P. A. Francis and B. B. Ahuja, M. N. Shroff, R. S. Chauhan and R. N. Sachthey for the Petitioners.
A forensic defeat cannot be avenged by an invitation to have a second look, hopeful of discovery of flaws and reversal of result.
I agree with my learned brother Pathak J, both on the restrictive review jurisdiction and the rejection of the prayer in this case subject to the qualifications made below.
Mrs. Shyamala Pappu and A. Minocha for Zonth Club.
Soli J. Sorabjee, Addl.
KRISHNA IYER, J. A plea for review, unless the first judicial view is manifestly distorted, is like asking for the moon.
On appeal, this Court took a companytrary view and held that when meals were served to casual visitors in the restaurant operated by the appellant the service must be regarded as providing for the satisfaction of human need and companyld number be regarded as companystituting a sale of food when all that the visitors were entitled to do was to eat the food served to them and were number entitled to remove or carry away uneaten food.
K. Gambhir for State of Madhya Pradesh.
111 112 of 1978.
Lalit Bhasin, Vinay Bhasin and Vineet Kumar for South Region Fariya Hotel.
K. Rao and A. T. M. Sampath for Tamil Nadu Hotel Association.
In a reference made to the High Court of Delhi under s. 21 3 of the Bengal Finance Sales Tax Act, 1941 as extended to the Union Territory of Delhi, the High Court expressed the opinion that the service of meals to casual visitors in the restaurant was taxable as a sale.
The Judgment of V. D. Tulzapurkar and R. S. Pathak, JJ.
