Mumbai Court June 1960 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.
Sitaram Mulchand Transport Co. Vs. Bashir Ahmed Stattoo and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-15-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Bom73; (1960)62BOMLR930; ILR1961Bom179; (1960)IILLJ655Bom
Chainani, C. J. 1. The facts giving rise to this application are that the first opponent (hereinafter referred to as the opponent) was formerly in the service of the petitioners. The petitioners are a transport company, of which Sitaram Mulchand is the owner. In 1958 the opponent made an application under the Payment of Wages Act to the Authority constituted under that Act, for recovering from the petitioners about Rs. 1325, which according to him was due to him from the petitioners, on account of his wages, which had not been paid. The petitioners disputed the claim of the opponent and alleged that only Rs. 16.44 were due to the opponent. The application made by the opponent came up for hearing on 6th May 1959. On that date the petitioners were absent. The opponent was examined and thereafter the matter was adjournedfor passing an order on the application. The date on which the order was to be made was not announced, nor was it intimated to the parties. According to the petitioners th...
Sitaram Mulchand Transport Company Vs. Bashir Ahmed Shatto
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-15-1960
Reported in: [1960(1)FLR588]
Chainani, C.J.1. The facts giving rise to this application are that opponent 1 (hereinafter referred to as the opponent) was formerly in the service of the petitioners. The petitioners are a transport company, of which Sitaram Mulchand is the owner. In 1958 the opponent made an application under the Payment Wages Act to the authority constituted under that Act, for recovering from the petitioners about Rs. 1,325, which according to him was due to him from the petitioners, on account of his wages, which had not been paid. The petitioners disputed the claim of the opponent and alleged that only Rs. 16.44 were due to the opponent. The application made by the opponent came up for hearing on 6 May 1959. On that date the petitioners were absent. The opponent was examined and thereafter the matter was adjourned for passing an order on the application. The date on which the order was to be made was not announced, nor was it intimated to the parties. According to the petitioners they were absen...
Narayan Laxman Rao Patil Vs. Keshav Bhimji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-15-1960
Reported in: (1960)62BOMLR889
Naik, J.1. This is an application, in revision, from the order of the Additional Collector, Aurangabad, dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner. Narayan Laxman, the petitioner, was the owner of Survey No. 821 situate at Shevar. One Keshav Bhimji, respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) was the tenant in respect of the said land. A provisional declaration was made under Section 38-E of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in favour of the respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner made an applicaion to the Tahsildar contending that his holding is less than the extent of two family holdings. He suggested that Survey Nos. 834 and 1102/3 together measuring 61 acres 3 gunthas belonged to his deceased brother, Trimbak, and after the death of the latter, those lands were inherited by his widow, Dwarkabai. It appears that the respondent had made an application before the Tahsildar stating that he was not prepared to purcha...
Aboobakar Dawood and ors. Vs. Potdar (V.B.) and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-14-1960
Reported in: (1963)ILLJ398Bom
1. The petitioners are employed as weavers in the silk mills of the second respondents. According to them each of them was employed on a monthly wage of Rs. 165, per month; but this is not admitted by the second respondents hereinafter referred to as the respondents. The respondents' case is that in November 1958 an agreement was arrived at with all the weavers as well as the assistant secretary of their union, according to which the weavers were to be paid on a piece-rate basis at the rate of 19 pies per yard. In May 1959, five weavers including the three petitioners, made applications to the Payment of Wages Authority in which they contended that the respondents had unlawfully deducted Rs. 125 from their wages during the period 1 December, 1958 to 30 April, 1959. They contended that during this period, each of them should have been paid at the rate of Rs. 165 per month. It was urged before the Payment of Wages authority on behalf of the respondents that, as there were two rival contr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›