Mumbai Court September 1987 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.
Union of India and Others Vs. Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd. and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1987
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR581
Pendse J.1. This petition involves an important question relating to the constitutional validity of sections 21 and 22 read with section 2(r) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), in its application to an undertaking connected with the publication of a newspaper. The petitioners challenge the validity of these provisions on the ground of violation of fundamental rights conferred under article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.2. Petitioner No. 1 is a joint stock company governed by the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, and has its registered office at the Times of India Building, Bombay, while petitioner No. 2 is a shareholder and executive director of petitioner No. 1. The Times of India is published by petitioner No. 1 from New Delhi, Bombay and Ahmedabad and the Hindi newspaper Nav Bharat Times is published from New Delhi and Bombay. Jansevak Karyalaya Ltd., 8, Camac Street, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as '...
Maharashtra General Kamgar Union and Others Vs. Balkrishna Pen Pvt. Lt ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1987
Reported in: 1987(3)BomCR425; (1989)ILLJ319Bom; 1988MhLJ832
Sawant, J.1. This petition is directed against the order of the Industrial Court passed under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). By the impugned decision, the Court has allowed the complaint filed by the employer and has declared that the strike which was commenced from 9th January, 1981 was illegal and that the respondents to the complaint (who included the President of the Union and some of the employees and one non-employee) had committed unfair labour practices referred to in items 1, 2, 5 and 6 of Schedule III of the Act. By the same order the Industrial Court has also granted permanent injunctions in several terms against the respondents.2. Mr. Damania, learned Counsel appearing for the employer, stated that without prejudice to the employer's contention that the respondents were guilty of the unfair labour practices as held by the Industrial Court, and that the injunctions grante...
Keshav Soma Tawde and Others Vs. State Peoples (Pvt.) Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1987
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ410Bom
1. The original petitioner-Keshav Soma Tawde (since deceased) was in the permanent employment, as a compositor, on monthly salary of Rs. 464 for 29 years, of the first respondent, State Peoples (Private), Ltd., Company, Janmabhumi Bhavan, Ghoga Street, Fort, Bombay 400 001. He was charge sheeted on 22nd June 1977, on the allegation that he was involved in an offence of theft of the property belonging to the first respondent and that he absented from duty. He has submitted explanation to the charge sheet on 28th June 1977, denying the allegation made against him. Thereafter, a domestic enquiry was held in which he was found guilty and ultimately by an order, dated 9/19 November 1977, he was discharged from service with immediate effect.2. Aggrieved by the said action of the first respondent, the said workman lodged a complaint with the Government Labour Officer, Bombay, for his restatement with continuity of service and back-wages. However, the first respondent refused to take him back ...
Maneck Gopal Divekar Vs. Phoenix Mills Limited and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-10-1987
Reported in: (1987)89BOMLR456; (1993)IIILLJ69Bom
H.H. Kantharia, J. 1. Quite an interesting and important question of law that is canvassed in this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is the interpretation of the term 'reinstatement' in labour jurisprudence.2. The petitioner joined the services of the first respondent in the year 1945. He was confirmed as a jobber in the drawing department in the year 1956. The mills had to be closed down on and from 21st September, 1977 on account of a fire therein. However, the drawing department was restarted on and from 13th October, 1977. Before the working was restarted, there was a settlement between the management of the first respondent and the Rashtriya Mills Mazdoor Sangh, a representative union. Under the said settlement, it was inter alia agreed to retrench three jobbers out of nine who were in the employment prior to the date of the fire. It was further agreed that as and when the working of the sections would restart, the persons employed in those sections woul...
M. RamnaraIn Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the State Trading Corporation of I ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Bom45; 1988(2)BomCR59
Pendse, J.1. The State Trading Corporation of India Limited the respondent, original plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation') is constituted for the purpose of effecting and encouraging exports of goods of Indian origin to foreign countries. The appellant No. 1-original defendant No. 1 is a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and carries on business of exporting textile goods, while appellant No. 2-originai defendant No. 2 is a Director of defendant No. 1. The Corporation instituted suit on the Original Side of this Court on July 15, 1970 for recovery of Rs. 23.88,998.91 with interest on Rs. 18.18,451.39 paise at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till judgment and thereafter at the rate of 6% per annum till payment or realisation. The claim made by the Corporation in the plaint was that by letter dated June 4, June 6 and June 26, 1967 defendant No. 1 represented to the plaintiff-Corporation that defendant No. 1...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd. and ors ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1987
Reported in: 1988(3)BomCR581a; (1987)89BOMLR485
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd. (hereinafter called 'the company') publishes the newspapers 'The Times of India' and 'Nav Bharat Times'. In 1983, company called Jansevak Karyalaya Ltd. (Jansevak) entered into negotiations with the company for printing and publishing editions of The Times of India and Nav Bharat Times from a press to be established at Lucknow. Three agreements dated June 4, 1983, July 30, 1983 and October 1, 1983 were entered into. In pursuance of the agreement, necessary applications were made under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867. On October 17, 1983, the first edition of the The Times of India and Nav Bharat Times were issued from Lucknow. The City Magistrate at Lucknow commenced proceedings under the Press and Registration of Books Act it regard to complaints received that the provisions of that Act had been contravened. These proceedings were stayed in a writ petition filed by Jansevak in the High Court at Calcutta. The stay order wit...
Kumar Ram Nandan Vs. Fulid Power Private Limited and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1987
Reported in: (1995)IIILLJ347Bom
Kantharia, J.1. The petitioner was employed as a helper by the first respondent in the year 1965 on permanent basis. He was served with a charge-sheet dated 7th November, 1975 alleging that he threw away and caused damage to some wooden cases which were kept ready for despatch to the Ministry of Defence, Heavy Vehicle Factory, Madras. The petitioner, on 14th November, 1975, gave a reply to the said charge-sheet. He denied the allegations made against him and contended that on 7th November, 1975 when he reported for duty as usual, he noticed that some wooden cases were kept in such a manner that blocked his way to his locker where he kept his clothes and therefore he removed and kept them aside and that he did not cause any damage to them. He further stated that if, however, any damage was caused to the said cases on account of his acts, he was sorry for it. He begged of the first respondent that if any enquiry was contemplated against him he may be permitted to defend himself with the ...
India Security Press Mazdoor Sangh Vs. Currency Note Press and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1987
Reported in: (1993)IIILLJ58Bom
Sawant, J.1. The question that falls to be considered in the present petition is whether the change effected in the hours of work is illegal.2. The Petitioners are a trade union representing the workmen in the 1st Respondent-Currency Note Press, and the 2nd Respondent-India Security Press. The Respondents-Presses on 10th Jan. and 29th Jan. 1983, respectively, gave notices of change under Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') reducing the number of weekly hours of work from 66 to 54. This necessitated a change in the hours of day and night shifts. The current and proposed working hours in the day and night shifts were as follows:'CURRENT WORKING HOURSPROPOSED WORKING HOURSDay ShiftNight ShiftDay ShiftNight Shift7.00 A.M.To12.00 Noon &6.45 P.M.To11.45 P.M. &7.00 A.M.To12.00 Noon &4.45 P.M.To9.45 P.M.1.00 P.M.To7.00 P.M.12.45 P.M.To6.45 P.M.1.00 P.M.To5.00 P.M.10.45 P.M.To2.45 A.M.(Recess 12.00 NoonTo1.00 P.M.)(Recess 11.45 P.M.To12.45 A.M.)...
Alen Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. R.H. Windsor (i) Ltd. and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Bom352; 1988(3)BomCR143; 1988MhLJ238
ORDER1. The plaintiff, a Co-operative Bank, sues to recover Rs. 59042/- and interest due on a Hundi drawn by defendant 2 and accepted by defendant 1. At the request of defendant 2, of which defendants 3 and 4 are partners, the plaintiffs agreed to discount bills issued by defendant 2 in respect of certain steel plates supplied by the latter to defendant 1. The Hundi drawn by defendant 2 was accepted by defendant 1. When presented, on 24th Aug. 1984, the Hundi was dishonoured.2. The defendants have urged that the Hundi should be held to have been unstamped and, therefore, inadmissible in evidence. The Hundi is written on the first sheet. Annexed to this sheet, there are two additional blank hundi papers, each of which bears the signature of defendant 2. No portion of the Hundi is written on these sheets. The threehundi papers together make up the requisite stamp duty. The bill is written only on the first sheet. On these facts, the question is whether the Hundi is duly stamped as requir...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Kallappa Devu Girmal and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-07-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)BomCR234
S.M. Daud, J.1. This is an appeal of the State taking exception to the acquittal of a man and wife who were charged for the alleged commission of an offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the I.P.C.2. The prosecution case is that deceased Parisha Babu Girmal and accused No. 1 Kallapa Devu Girmal are first cousins being agriculturists and residents of village Abdul-Lat, Taluka Shirol, District: Kolhapur. Relations between the cousins were seriously strained, there having taken place a number of incidents and differences which led to the institution of case and counter-cases in civil as also Criminal Courts. To make matter worse, the lands they owned or at least some of them are so situated as to occasion further disputes. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 have a son by the name of Kumar.3. On 15th April, 1979 Parisha on the one hand and the accused along with their son Kumar on the other, were working in their respective lands. At about 11.00 a.m. Parisha's work being over, he ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »