Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1930All225
1. One Basdeonand Gir obtained leave to appeal to the Privy Council and on the due date deposited a sum of Rs. 4,000 as security for costs and a further sum for printing charges.2. On 2nd November 1927 Mr. Newal Kishore, who was the legal practitioner for Shankernand Gir the respondent to the Privy Council appeal, drafted an application to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Allahabad in which he prayed that the cash certificates for Rs. 4,000-12-0 and a sum of Rs. 798-11-0 for printing charges, which had been paid into the High Court by the appellant, might be attached:and the amount of the decree may be so far as possible satisfied by attachment thereof.3. The application came before Sudeshar Maitra on 4th February 1928. His order was a short one and may be given in full.The items objected to relate to the printing charges and security furnished by the defendant objector in connexion with his appeal to His Majesty in Council. The decree-holder is anxious to lay his hands on these i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Privy Council
The Lord Chancellor: On 16th September 1926 the Performing Right Society, Ltd., hereinafter called the appellants, issued a writ against the Urban District Council of Bray hereinafter called the respondents, claiming an injunction to restrain the respondents, their servants or agents, from infringing the appellants' copyright by performing in public the musical works known as "Venus on Earth" (Lincke) and " Lilac Time " (Sehubert, Clutsam). The learned Judge (Johnston, J.) decided in favour of the appellants. His judgment was reversed by an order of the Supreme Court (Kennedy, C. J. and Fitzgibbon, J.), dated 15th November 1927. The present appeal is from that order. "Venus on Earth" was composed by a German national, and was first published in Germany in 1896 or 1897, and the performing right in it was assigned by the composer to the appellants on 19th May 1925. "Lilac Time" was the work of an English national, and was composed in the autumn of 1921. It was assigned by the composer to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Crowell v. Benson - 285 U.S. 22 (1932) U.S. Supreme Court Crowell v. Benson, 285 U.S. 22 (1932) Crowell v. Benson No. 19 Argued October 20, 21, 1931 Decided February 23, 1932 * 285 U.S. 22 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. In virtue of its power to alter or revise the maritime law, Congress may provide that, where employees in maritime employment are disabled or die from accidental injuries arising out of or in the course of their employment upon the navigable waters of the United States, their employers shall pay reasonable compensation, without regard to fault as the cause of injury, and be thereby relieved from other liability. P. 285 U. S. 39 . 2. The Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, which provides a scheme for compensation in the class of cases above described, applicable if recovery "through workmen's compensation proceedings may not validly be provided by State law," upheld as to substantive provisions...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Spencer Kellogg & Sons, Inc. v. Hicks - 285 U.S. 502 (1932) U.S. Supreme Court Spencer Kellogg & Sons, Inc. v. Hicks, 285 U.S. 502 (1932) Spencer Kellogg & Sons, Inc. v. Hicks No. 430 Argued February 16, 17, 1932 Decided April 11, 1932 * 285 U.S. 502 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 1. A corporation operating a factory on the New Jersey side of the Hudson River owned a launch which it used for ferrying employees to and from their work there, a distance of somewhat more than a mile. The launch was not seaworthy when ice was in the river, and the company had therefore instructed the manager of the factory, who also controlled the use of the launch, not to allow it to be used when ice was, or was likely to be, present. Disobedience to these instructions, by the master of the launch, resulted in injuries and deaths of passengers. Held: (1) In view of weather conditions and observation of ice in the river some days before, the manager should no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. United States - 289 U.S. 627 (1933) U.S. Supreme Court Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. United States, 289 U.S. 627 (1933) Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. United States No. 1 Argued October 12, 13, 1931 Reargued October 11, 12, 1932 Decided May 29, 1933 289 U.S. 627 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Syllabus 1. Carriers reaching the port of New Orleans with their own rails and reaching Texas ports through connections with which they maintained through routes and joint rates made the same, or substantially the same, rates on export, import, and coastwise traffic between New Orleans and inland points as were charged between those points and the Texas ports, although the rail haul to and from New Orleans was longer. Ocean freights were the same for all of these ports, and the object of the rail carriers in equalizing their rates was to protect their business of the classes named from the competit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1933All690; 145Ind.Cas.481
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an appeal by 27 accused persons in what is known as the Meerut Conspiracy case. The trial has become somewhat notorious on account of its unprecedented duration. All the accused persons, except Hutchinson, were arrested in March 1929, (Hutchinson was arrested in June of the same year) and have all this time, except for the period during which some of them were released on bail, been detained in jail. The trial commenced in the Court of the Committing Magistrate on a complaint filed on 15th March 1929, and on a supplementary complaint against Hutchinson on 11th June 1929.2. The entire proceedings have now lasted for nearly four years and a half. This is accounted for as follows: (1) The preliminary proceedings before the Magistrate took over seven months, resulting in the commitment of the accused to the Court of Session on 14th January 1930; (2) in the Sessions Court the prosecution evidence took over 13 months; (3) the recording of the statements of the accuse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Home Building & Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell - 290 U.S. 398 (1934) U.S. Supreme Court Home Building & Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1934) Home Building & Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell No. 370 Argued November 8, 9, 1933 Decided January 8, 1934 290 U.S. 398 APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA Syllabus 1. Emergency does not increase constitutional power, nor diminish constitutional restrictions. P. 290 U. S. 425 . 2. Emergency may, however, furnish occasion for exercise of power possessed. P. 290 U. S. 426 . 3. The clause providing that no State shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts is not to be applied with literal exactness, like a mathematical formula, but is one of the broad clauses of the Constitution which require construction to fill out details. Pp. 290 U. S. 426 , 290 U. S. 428 . 4. The necessity of construction of the contract clause is not obviated by its association in the same section with other and more specific provisions which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Jefferson Electric Mfg. Co. - 291 U.S. 386 (1934) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Jefferson Electric Mfg. Co., 291 U.S. 386 (1934) United States v. Jefferson Electric Manufacturing Co. No. 171 Argued December 15, 18, 1933 Decided February 12, 1934 * 291 U.S. 386 CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus 1. As a general rule, where the legislation dealing with a particular subject consists of a system of related general provisions indicative of a settled policy, new enactments of a fragmentary nature on that subject are to be taken as intended to fit into the existing system and to be carried into effect conformably to it, excepting as a different purpose is plainly shown. P. 291 U. S. 396 . 2. A manufacturer from whom money had been collected as taxes on account of sales of his products, upon the erroneous assumption that the articles sold were automobile parts or accessories and the sales therefore taxable under Revenue Acts, 1924, 600(3) and 1918...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Clark v. Williard - 292 U.S. 112 (1934) U.S. Supreme Court Clark v. Williard, 292 U.S. 112 (1934) Clark v. Williard No. 449 Argued February 15, 1934 Decided April 2, 1934 292 U.S. 112 CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF MONTANA Syllabus 1. Where a judgment reverses the cause and remands it for further proceedings in accordance with the court's opinion, the opinion is incorporated in the judgment, and may be considered in determining whether the judgment is final. P. 292 U. S. 118 . 2. A judgment of a state supreme court in a liquidation proceeding which sustains the validity and priority of an execution levied by an intervening creditor on property of the insolvent, leaving no discretion to the trial court with respect to the matter and fully disposing of the intervention, is a final judgment for the purposes of appeal to this Court. P. 292 U. S. 117 . 3. Under the laws of Iowa, the official liquidator appointed by statute upon the dissolution of an insolvent Iowa insur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
PANAMA REFINING CO. v. RYAN - 292 U.S. 388 (1935) U.S. Supreme Court PANAMA REFINING CO. v. RYAN, 293 U.S. 388 (1935) 293 U.S. 388 PANAMA REFINING CO. et al. v. RYAN et al. AMAZON PETROLEUM CORPORATION et al. v. SAME. Nos. 135, 260. Argued Dec. 10, 11, 1934. Decided Jan. 7, 1935. Page 293 U.S. 388, 391 Messrs. J. N. Saye, of Longview, Tex., and F. W. Fischer, of Tyler, Tex., for petitioners. Page 293 U.S. 388, 398 Mr. Harold M. Stephens, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondents. Page 293 U.S. 388, 405 Mr. Chief Justice HUGHES delivered the opinion of the Court. On July 11, 1933, the President, by Executive Order No. 6199 (15 USCA 709 note), prohibited 'the transportation in interstate and foreign commerce of petroleum and the products thereof produced or withdrawn from storage in excess of the amount permitted to be produced or withdrawn from storage by any State law or valid regulation or order prescribed thereunder, by any board, commission, officer, or other duly Page ...
Tag this Judgment!