Mumbai Court October 1957 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Madhya Pradesh Mineral Industry Association Vs. the Regional Labour Co ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom332; (1958)60BOMLR489; ILR1959Bom188
S.P. Kotval, J.1. In this petition is raised a question of importance to the manganese mining industry. The question raised relates to the applicability of the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, to persons employed in stone breaking and stone crushing operations carried on at the mines. The petition is moved at the instance of a limited liability, non-profit-making Company registered under Section 26 of the Indian Companies Act. The petitioner claims to represent its 65 associated members owning 230 manganese mines, and since the question raised is one of the applicability of the Act to the industry as a whole, we have permitted the petitioner to move the petition though no right special to the petitioner has been shown to be infringed. Moreover, the respondents did not object at the hearing to the petitioner being allowed to represent its members without any particular injury, or infringement of right being made out.2. The facts upon which the petition is founded lie within a ...
State Vs. J.D. Daroga and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom314; (1959)61BOMLR118; 1959CriLJ959; ILR1959Bom340
ORDER1. This is a reference under Section 438. Criminal Procedure Code, by the learned Sessions Judge, Thana, for revising the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Shahapur, by which order the learned Magistrate held that the prosecution was debarred from tendering the evidence of four witnesses whom the prosecution intended to examine as additional witnesses.2. The facts necessary to be stated in order to dispose of the present reference are as follows: The prosecution alleged that on or about 10-3-1956, several offences were committed by five persons who were picnicking in the compound of the Special Bungalow at Tansa reserved for the Special Engineer, Bombay Corporation. The police raided the aforesaid premises at about 8 P.M. on the aforesaid date and the prosecution case is that at that time those five persons were found in possession of a bottle of whisky and some glasses. The prosecution also alleged that two of the aforesaid five persons, who held permits for l...
Aruna Mills Ltd. Vs. Industrial Court, Bombay and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1957
Reported in: (1958)60BOMLR206; (1958)IILLJ388Bom
Chainani, J.1. The petitioner is a public limited company running a cotton textile mill at Ahmedabad. In 1948 the industrial court made an award known as the Standardization award, by which the wages of all employees, including assistant stampers, but excluding clerks, were fixed. In 1949 the industrial court made another award fixing the wages of clerks. Subsequently, on 22 June 1949 there was an agreement between the Textile Labour Association, Ahmedabad, which is a representative union, and the Ahmedabad Millowner's' Association by which the wages of clerks were revised. Respondents 6 to 11 in this petition, who are the only contesting respondents and to whom I will hereafter refer as the respondents, are employed as assistant stampers in the mill run by the petitioner. Since 1948, they were being paid wages fixed for assistant stampers by the Standardization award. On 20 March 1956, respondent 6 through a union, wrote a letter Ex. 19 to the petitioner. In Para. 5 of that letter he ...
Nagpur Yarn and Dyes Merchants Association Vs. State of Bombay and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1957
Reported in: (1958)60BOMLR238; [1958]9STC530(Bom)
ORDERMudholkar, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by the Association of the Nagpur Yarn and Dyes Merchants. Along with this Association five persons who are carrying on the business of dyeing yarn have also joined as petitioners. 2. Two points have been raised in this petition and they are (i) that no sales tax is payable by the petitioners for dyeing yarn of the customers handed over to them for the purpose of dyeing, and (ii) that no sales tax is payable upon the sale of yarn purchased by the petitioners, dyed and then sold as dyed yearn. In so far as the second point is concerned there is hardly any difficulty. Under section 6(1) of the Central Provinces and Barer Sales Tax Act, 1947, no tax shall be payable under this Act on the sale of goods specified in the second column of Schedule II, subject to the conditions and exceptions, if any, set out in the corresponding entry in the third column thereof. Entry No. 20 in that Schedule is as follows : 'Yarn ex...
Nathubhai Dhulaji and ors. Vs. the Municipal Corporation, Bombay and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom332; (1958)60BOMLR515; ILR1958Bom824
Dixit, J.1. These two appeals arise from decrees passed by the City Civil Court, Bombay, dismissing the appellants' suits. Although these appeals which have been fully and ably argued on both sides are heard together, they will have to be dealt with separately. The principal argument was addressed in First Appeal No. 224 of 1957 and for the sake of convenience, I will deal with that appeal first.2. The facts giving rise to suit No. 2011 of 1956, from which appeal No. 224 of 1957 arises, are shortly these. The plaintiffs are tenants of a building known as 'Mor Bungalow', situate at Tejpal Road, Vile Parle. It appears that the house was constructed in or about the year 1910. On 28-12-1954 a notice under Section 354 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act was served upon defendant No. 1, which is a limited company and the owner of he property, requiring the first defendant to do certain repairs. On 14-2-1956 a second notice under Section 354 was served upon defendant No. 1 asking the firs...
Shankar Madhavrao Solav Vs. M.K. Sarode and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom371
Mudholkar, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order of the State Industrial Court, Nagpur, which upheld the order of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh, directing reinstatement of the respondent No. 1 and payment of Rs. 1000/- as compensation to him for failure to reinstate. 2. The only point which we need consider in this case is whether the Assistant Labour Commissioner had jurisdiction to make the aforesaid order. It may be mentioned that when that order came to be passed Section 16 of the C.P. and Berar Industrial Disputes Settlement Act, prior to its amendment by Act XXI of 1955, was in force. Under the old provision the Labour Commissioner had jurisdiction to act under Section 16 only with respect to an industrial dispute which arose in a factory and not merely in an industry. That being the position, what has to be considered here is whether the activity carried on by the petitioner can be regarded as a factory. The a...
Matubhai Jameitram and anr. Vs. the Custodian of Evacuee Property, Bom ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-10-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom162; (1958)60BOMLR999
ORDER1. This is a Chamber Summons taken out by the Applicants who are a firm of Solicitors against their own clients for certain reliefs by way of a declaration of a lien for payment of their costs and for an order for payment of their cost. It will, however, be necessary for me later to set out and discuss the exact reliefs prayed for by this summons as the same are in dispute.2. This suit was originally filed on 27-11-1948 by one Adam Haji Pirmahomed Essak as the sole Plaintiff claiming damages for breach of a contract. The applicants were the Solicitors of the Plaintiff. During the pendency of this suit in July 1952 the applicants came to know that the Plaintiff had been declared an evacuee. The applicants therefore wrote a letter dated 18-7-1952 to the Assistant Custodian of Evacuee Property, Bombay setting out shortly the facts relating to this suit. The applicants further wrote:'We understand that the above mentioned plaintiffs are adjudged evacuees. We suggest that the Custodian...
Bai Manuben and ors. Vs. Bhimabhai Nagarji and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom471; (1958)60BOMLR122; ILR1959Bom182
1. The property in dispute belongs to plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2. It consists of shop buildings on the ground floor and also of a first floor. This entire property had been leased to one Shivajirao sometime in the year, 1946, Shivajirao continued as a tenant of plaintiffs 1 and 2 till 12-7-1948, on which date he gave up possession of the property on the ground that he did not want it. Thereafter on, the same day the ground floor of the said property, which consisted of shop buildings, was leased to plaintiff No. 3; Plaintiff No. 3 got possession of the shop buildings on the same day and put his own lock on them. When Shivajirao, the original tenant of the entire properly, left the premises, it appears that some luggage of his brother Chimanrao had been kept in the shop buildings on the ground floor. On 27-7-1948 defendant No. 1, who is the wife of Chimanrao, and defendant No. 3, who is the other brother of Chimanrao, took the key from plaintiff No. 3 on representing to him that they would...
In Re: Trikamlal Maneklal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-08-1957
Reported in: [1958]33ITR725(Bom)
Shah, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions for decision to us : '(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the question regarding allowability of the interest of Rs. 9,307 could be agitated by the Department before the Tribunal hearing the appeal after the order dated 12th January, 1954 (2) If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the interest of Rs. 9,307 was an admissible deduction under section 12(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act ?' 2. The facts which give rise to the two questions may be briefly set out. The assessee was assessed in the year 1951-52 for the accounting year Samvat year 2006 in respect of income from business in speculation, salary from Ind. Corporation Limited and T. Maneklal Ltd., income from partnership business in the names of Messrs. T. Maneklal ., and income from 'other sources' such as interest, director's fees and net divi...
In Re: Trikamlal Maneklal and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom351; (1958)60BOMLR63; ILR1958Bom694
Shah, J.REFERENCE NO. 39 OF 1956 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions for decision to us:(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the question regarding allowability of the interest of Rs. 9,307/- could be agitated by the Department before the Tribunal hearing the appeal after the order dated 12-1-1954? (2) If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the interest of Rs. 9,307/- was an admissible deduction under Section 12(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act? 2. The facts which give rise to the two questions may be briefly set out. The assessee was assessed in the year 1951-52 for the accounting year Samvat Year 2006 in respect of Income from business in speculation, salary from Ind. Corporation Ltd. and T. Maneklal Ltd., income from partnership business in the names of Messrs. T. Maneklal Mfg. Co. and T. Maneklal Ltd., and income from 'other sources' such as...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »