Untwalia, J. - (1.) The appeallant's writ petition filed in the High Court of Gujarat was dismissed in limine by a Bench of the High Court on October 19, 1970. The Commissioner of Income tax, Gujarat II, respondent No. 1 was the authority against whom several reliefs had been claimed in the writ petition. Subsequently were added the other members of the family of the appellant as respondents to the writ petition. The appellant obtained a certificate from the High Court for appeal to this Court under sub-clause (b) of clause (1) ofArticle 133 of the Constitution of India as it stood before the 30th Constitution Amendment Act. Hence this appeal to this Court.
(2.) Having heard Mr. B. R. L. lyengar, Senior Advocate for the appellant at some length we found that the appellant was ill-advised to file the writ petition and to pursue the matter upto this Court. The appeal being devoid of any substance must fail. We proceed to state the facts and discuss the points urged before us very briefly.
(3.) One Bapalal Purshottamdas Modi was the head of a Hindu undivided family. The Joint family possessed many immovable properties and carried on business of various types such as money-lending etc. Bapalal had five sons namely Vadilal, Ramanlal, Jayantilal, Gulbchand and Kantilal. Ramanlal died long ago in or about the year 1933 Jayantilal died in 1956. The appellant is one of the sons of Jayantilal.;