Mumbai Court April 1965 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.
Bharat Textile Engineering Works Vs. N.A. Athalve and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-27-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Bom433; (1966)ILLJ582Bom
(1) These two applications are between the same parties. The petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 38 of 1964 are a partnership firm doing the business of engraving textile designs on copper rolls used for textile printing. A dispute between them and their workmen the 2nd respondent was referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal. The Industrial Tribunal made an award on 25th September 1963. Against the Award the employers have filed special civil application No. 38 of 1964 while the Union has filed the other application No. 199 of 1964.(2) Mr. Shah, who appears on behalf of the petitioners in the first application, has raised three points. The Tribunal has directed the payment of gratuity at the rate of 7 days' wages for each completed year of service, to workmen who had completed seven years' continuous service. The wages paid by the petitioners are consolidated wages Mr. Shah has contended that gratuity is ordinarily awarded on the basis of the basic wages of a worke...
Sarjubai Madangopal Bhangadia Vs. Pukhraj Motilal Kochar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1965
Reported in: (1965)67BOMLR926
Patel, J.1. [His Lordship after stating the facts and dealing with points not material to this report, proceeded.] Mr. Padhye then contended that in any event the plaintiff is entitled to a decree as the heir of Madangopal as she has now obtained the necessary succession certificate. In this connection, it must be noted that in the trial Court the plaintiff had not produced succession certificate, nor had she made any application whatsoever for the same. It seems that during the pendency of the suit on February 22, 1955, the learned Judge had drawn the attention of the plaintiff's advocate to the fact that as regards her alternative claim she would have to produce a succession certificate. As at the date of the judgment she had not obtained succession certificate, he dismissed her suit without considering the alternative claim.2. It is argued by Mr. Deo, that it is not within the power of the appellate Court to reverse the decree of the trial Court on the ground that she has now obtain...
Ankush Narayan Shingate Vs. Janabai Kom Rama Sawat and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-23-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Bom174; (1965)67BOMLR864; 1966MhLJ92
K.K. Desai, J.(1) This is plaintiff appeal against the judgment and decree dated December 31, 1958 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division. Satara, dismissing the plaintiff special Civil suit No. 10 of 1957,(2) The relevant of facts are as follow: About 40 years prior to 1957 [the date of the suit], one Narayan died intestate of at village Mardhe, living him surviving as his only heirs and next of kin his two windows respectively senior Laxmibai, and Junior Tanubai and one Janabai, daughters to the senior widow Laxmibai. He left 23 properties at villages Mardhe, all or which are mentioned in schedule of properties annexed t the plaint. The two widows appears of the to have mortgaged properties mentioned in serial Nos. 4 to 9 12 to 15 and 17. All these properties were in course, of time redeemed by defendants No.2 Janabai the daughters of senior widow Laxmbai. The properties in Serial Nos. 20 and 21 were sold in 1937 to defendants No.3, property serial No. 18, was sold by defendants ...
Shaligram Hiralal Chandak Vs. Govindrao Ratanlal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-23-1965
Reported in: (1965)67BOMLR702; 1966MhLJ67
Patel, J.1. [His Lordship after stating the facts, proceeded.] In this appeal the grounds of attack are limited by Mr. Manohar. He made three contentions:1. That respondent No. 2 was guilty of a corrupt practice inasmuch as a leaflet exh. 122 was published by his supporters with his consent or, in any event, with the consent of his election agent. The contents of this leaflet fell within the definition of corrupt practice as contained in Section 123, Sub-section (3A) and Sub-section (4), of the Act.2. That the acceptance of the nomination paper of respondent No. 3 inspite of his disqualification fell within the provisions of Section 100, Sub-section (i), Clause (d) and as it had affected the results of the election, the election of respondent No. 2 should be set aside.3. That an application which he made for amendment of his petition under Order VI, r, 17, of the Civil Procedure Code, read with the Act, was wrongly disallowed.2. The first contention is in respect of the Pamphlet exh. 1...
State of Bombay Vs. Ganpat Dhondiba Sawant
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-22-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Bom228; (1965)67BOMLR852; ILR1966Bom593; 1966MhLJ159
K.K. Desai, J.1. The first contention which has been made before us on behalf of the plaintiff, is as follows :- The State Government was not entitled to direct and/or hold the fresh departmental enquiry held by Sri Caldeira, because the scheme of the rules framed under the relevant provisions of law negatived the right in the Government to hold further enquiries after a defaulting Government servant was exonerated from the charges levelled against him in prior duly held departmental enquiry. The contention was that under S. 4 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, the State Government in its powers of superintendence was not entitled to direct a fresh enquiry as is contended for by the written statement. The contention was developed by arguing that there was no affirmative provision for revising in fresh enquiries findings made in prior enquiries that the defaulting Government servants were not guilty of charges levelled against them. The further argument was that powers of superintendence, ...
Maharashtra State Electricity Board Vs. Madhusudandass and Brothers
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Bom160; (1965)67BOMLR919; ILR1966Bom585
Patel, J.XX XX XX (1) The question is whether the revision of the tariff for the supply of the engorge of the different principle is ultra vires of the act and/or the rules under the act. The contention of is to be found in paragraph 11 (a) of the written statement of where these words are used. Mr. Thakar was not able to show how that the revised tariffs were in contravention of the provisions of the act. When pressed to clarify his contention is said the tariff were not fixed in accordance with the regulations which is entirely a different matter the regulations which is entirely a different matter. This clearly cannot mean that the Board acted ultra vires when the maker of the act has no power or jurisdiction to do in the thing. If the maker hangout the jurisdiction of doing the things, but if it is done in contravention of the rules one speaks of the though an allegation was made in para 11 of the written statement in this connection, 'twas vague was no particular regulation was al...
Chirak Chandu Khatik Vs. G.V. Kshirsagar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1965
Reported in: (1965)67BOMLR657; 1965MhLJ805
H.K. Chainani, C.J.1. The two petitioners and respondents Nos. 3 and 4 are members of the Village Panchayat of Akkalkuwa. On June 15, 1964, an election was held for electing the Sarpanch. There were two candidates at this election, petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 4. Each of them received five votes. Lots were then drawn and petitioner No. 1 was. declared as duly elected. One of the persons, who had voted in favour of petitioner No. 1, was Bajubai petitioner No. 2. On June 23, 1964, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 made applications to tie Collector evidently under Sub-section (5) of Section 33 of the Village Panchayats Act and requested the Collector to set aside the election of petitioner No. 1 on the ground that petitioner No. 2, who had voted in favour of petitioner No.. 1, had ceased to be a member of the Panchayat on April 29, 1964, under Clause (6) in Sub-section (1) of Section 40 of the Act. On July 21, 1964, the President, Zilla Parishad, passed an order stating that as petitioner ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Ii Vs. New Citizen Bank of Ind ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1965
Reported in: [1965]58ITR468(Bom)
V. S. Desai, J. 1. The question which is raised on this reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, at the instance of the department, relates to the double income-tax relief, to which the assessee has been held entitled by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. 2. The relief has been allowed in respect of four assessment years commencing from 1945-46, the previous years for the same being the corresponding calendar years. The assessee is a banking concern, having its head office in Bombay and branches at other places including Miraj, Sangli and Kolhapur, which were the erstwhile Indian States. The assessee maintained a consolidated account at the head office incorporating all branch profits including those of the branches located in the aforesaid Indian States. Now, in the relevant assessment years, with which we are concerned, the assessee had made profits in its banking business in its branches in the three Indian States of Miraj, Sangli and Kolhapur. It had sustained lo...
Premier Automobiles Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Circle I(3), Bombay a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1965
Reported in: [1966]59ITR656(Bom)
1. This petition has been filed by the Premier Automobile Limited under article 226 of the Constitution to challenge certain orders passed by an Income-tax Officer who is respondent No. 1 to the petition and confirmed by the 2nd respondent, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner for Income-tax. 2. The petitioner carries on the business of assembling and manufacturing motor vehicles. For enabling the petitioner to carry on that business, the petitioner entered into an agreement with Messrs. Chrysler Corporation of the U. S. A. in 1947. For some years past the petitioner has been assessee to income-tax as the statutory agent of Messrs. Chrysler Corporation in respect of the income earned by the Corporation under the said agreement. These assessment orders are the subject of references made to this court by the Labour Appellate Tribunal. We are not concerned with those orders in the present petition. The facts which gave rise to the present petition are that on 17th September, 1962, the 1st...
Argo Marine Supply Co. Vs. S.S. easthampton, an American Steamship
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-15-1965
Reported in: (1969)71BOMLR832
Tarkunde, J.1. This Notice of Motion has been taken out by a aviator in an admiralty suit. The suit was filed in rem by a supplier of necessaries to the vessel 'Easthampton' which was the 1st defendant in the suit. The second defendant was a Corporation registered in the U.S.A., which owned the vessel. The Corporation went into bankruptcy in the U.S.A. and is represented in the suit by trustees in bankruptcy. By an order made in the suit the vessel was sold by auction on 19th January 1965 for over two millions [sic] dollars. The aviator who has taken out this Notice of Motion, and who is referred to hereafter as the applicant, is also a Corporation registered in the U.S.A. and it claims an amount of Rs. 17,000 and odd for necessaries supplied to the vessel. The main prayers in the Notice of Motion are that the defendants to the suit may be ordered and decreed to pay to the applicant the sum of Rs. 17,000 and odd with interest and costs of the Notice of Motion and that the amount of the...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »