Mumbai Court March 1961 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.
State Vs. Ramjivan Kaluram and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Bom8; (1961)63BOMLR570; ILR1961Bom853
Datar, J.(1) This is a reference made by the Additional District Magistrate of Amravati for setting aside the orders passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in a proceeding under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, and for remanding the case to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for passing fresh orders on the basis that the preliminary order, though passed on 1-10-1959, must be deemed to have been passed on 18-7-1958.(2) A few facts may be stated before we consider the point raised in the reference.(3) One Ghasiram, who is described as party No. 1, claimed to be the owner of survey No.16 of Shirala. It is his case that this land had fallen to his share in a partition between him and his son Jagannath and he was therefore its exclusive owner. In 1957-58, he leased it to his separated son Jagannath who in his turn gave it to Ramjivan who is described as party No. 2 in these proceedings, on a batai agreement. After the expiry of the lease, Jagannath left the land after the crops were harves...
Yeshwanta Mahadeo Dhirde Vs. Nandkishore Ghanashyamlal Jaiswal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1961
Reported in: (1961)63BOMLR628
Abhyankar, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the applicant Yeshwanta Mahadeo Dhirde under the provisions of Sub-section (5) of Section 20-A of the C.P. & Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, against the decision of Mr. B. V. Patwardhan, Assistant Judge, Nagpur, by which the Assistant Judge dismissed the election petition filed by the petitioner Yeshwanta by his judgment dated August 3, 1960- By the original petition the applicant Yeshwanta challenged the election of the present opponent Nandkishore Ghanashyamlal Jaiswal who was elected as a member from Ward No. 10, called Vithal Mandir Ward, of Katol Municipal Committee. Nominations for elections as Ward Members from several wards were to be filed on May 25, 1959. The nomination papers were scrutinised on May 27, 1959. At the time of scrutiny of nomination paper of opponent Nandkishore, applicant Yeshwanta had raised an objection to the nomination paper of Nandkishore being accepted on the ground that Nandkishore was a Patel of ...
Ramchandra Govinda Vs. the State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Bom41; (1961)63BOMLR711; ILR1961Bom923
(1) The accused Ramchandra son of Govinda who was a Mechanical Signal Maintainer in the Central Railways at Dodra Mohor has filed this revision application against his conviction under S. 101 (a) and Section 101 (c) of the Indian Railway Act and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of four months under each count imposed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Railway), Nagpur, in Criminal Cas No. 237 of 1959 decided on 17-5-1960 and confirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 178 of 1960 decided on 9-11-1960.(2) The prosecution allegation is that the work of a system of interlocking of signals was under-taken on the railway track near the Kohili railway station. This wok was completed on 27-3-1959. After the completion of this work on the morning of 28-3-1959 Joshi (P. W. 2) who is the Signal Inspector in the railways, deputed the applicant and four other assistants to repair or put right the detector at point No. 29. The applicant and his help...
The Central Potteries Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1961
Reported in: (1961)63BOMLR709; (1961)IILLJ546Bom
Datar, J.1. Respondent No. 3 was an employee with the petitioner. For some misconduct, which was alleged against respondent No. 3, the petitioner dismissed him on January 27, 1957. This order of dismissal was upheld by the Assistant Labour Commissioner on July 13, 1957, but in revision the State Industrial Court reversed the order of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, and directed that respondent No. 3 be reinstated and paid the back-wages from the date of the order of dismissal i.e. January 27, 1957. This order of the State Industrial Court was confirmed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 388 of 1958, on April 15, 1959. Thereafter, the proceedings out of which the present Special Civil Application arises were started by respondent No. 3 for recovery of what he described as 'back-wages' computed from January 27, 1957 till April 15, 1959. The Assistant Labour Commissioner directed that the back-wages, which according to his calculation came to Rs. 1,673, be recovered as arre...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›