Court : US Supreme Court
Thompson v. Lawson - 347 U.S. 334 (1954) U.S. Supreme Court Thompson v. Lawson, 347 U.S. 334 (1954) Thompson v. Lawson No. 352 Argued March 9, 1954 Decided April 5, 1954 347 U.S. 334 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Otis and Julia Thompson were married in 1921, and lived together as husband and wife until 1925, when Otis deserted her. They were never divorced, but they never lived together again, and he never contributed anything to her support or that of their two children, nor did she ever seek to have him do so. Otis "married" another woman in 1929. In 1940, Julia "married" another man, and thereafter lived and held herself out as the latter's wife. She was divorced from him in 1949. Shortly before Otis' death, he asked Julia to "take him back," but she refused, having no intention of ever again living with him and resuming the relationship of husband and wife. Held: at the time of Otis' death in 1951, Julia was not his "wi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
American Textile Mfrs. Inst., Inc. v. Donovan - 452 U.S. 490 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court American Textile Mfrs. Inst., Inc. v. Donovan, 452 U.S. 490 (1981) American Textile Mfrs. Inst., Inc. v. Donovan No. 79-1429 Argued January 21, 1981 Decided June 17, 1981 * 452 U.S. 490 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Syllabus Section 6(b)(5) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (Act) requires the Secretary of Labor (Secretary), in promulgating occupational safety and health standards dealing with toxic materials or harmful physical agents, to set the standard "which most adequately assures, to the extent feasible, on the basis of the best available evidence" that no employee will suffer material impairment of health. Section 3(8) of the Act defines the term "occupational safety and health standard" as meaning a standard which requires conditions, or the adoption or use of practices, means, methods, operations, or process...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1700; 1984(32)BLJR380; [1984(49)FLR342]; (1984)IILLJ385SC; 1984(2)SCALE201; (1984)4SCC230; [1985]1SCR601; 1985(17)LC54(SC)
Chandrachud, C.J.1. The question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether a firm of lawyers is a 'commercial establishment' within the meaning of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960 (referred to herein as 'the Act').2. The appellant, V. Sasidharan, was working as a clerk in a firm of lawyers which is respondent 1 to this appeal. Respondents 2, 3 and 4 are partners of the firm. The services of the appellant were terminated by the firm on February 3, 1977, whereupon he preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority under the Act. A preliminary objection was raised in that appeal by the firm on the ground that it was not a commercial establishment. By a judgment dated August 11, 1977, the Appellate Authority upheld the preliminary objection and dismissed the appeal.3. Being aggrieved by that judgment, the appellant filed a writ petition (O.P. No. 3380 of 1977-B) in the High Court of Kerala. A learned single Judge of the High Court dismissed that writ p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC1459; (1963)65PLR727; [1964]2SCR114
Das Gupta, J.1. These two appeals raise the question whether certain buildings belongingto the respondent the British India Corporation Ltd., in one appeal and therespondent Shri Gopal Paper Mills Ltd., in the other appeal, are liable totaxation under the Punjab Urban Immovable Property Tax Act 1940. The buildingsin both these cases are situated in the rating area shown in the Schedule tothe Act and would consequently be liable to taxation under s. 3 of the Actunless the exemption provided in s. 4 of the Act is available. The sectionprovides that the tax shall not be levied in respect of the propertiesmentioned in cls. (a) to (g) thereof. Clause (g) mentions 'such buildingsand lands used for the purpose of a factory as may be prescribed.'Prescribed' has been defined as 'prescribed by the rules made underthe Act.' Rule 18 of the Punjab Urban Immovable Property Tax Rules, that wereframed by the Punjab Government in 1941, prescribed buildings and lands for thepurpose of clause (g) of s. 4...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC12; [1961(3)FLR73]; (1961)ILLJ631SC; [1962]1SCR946
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. The Government of Kerala appointed a Committee in exercise of its powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-s. (1) of s. 5 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Act XI of 1948) (hereafter called the Act), to hold enquiries and advise the Government in fixing minimum rates of wages in respect of employment in the tile industry and nominated eight persons to constitute the said Committee under s. 9 of the Act. This notification was published on August 14, 1957. The Committee made its report on March 30, 1958. The Government of Kerala then considered the report and issued a notification on May 12, 1958, prescribing minimum rates of wages as specified in the schedule annexed thereto. This notification was ordered to come into effect on May 26, 1958. On that date the present petition was filed under Art. 32 by the nine petitioners who represent six tile factories in Feroke, Kozhikode District, challenging the validity of the Act as well as the validity of the notification issued...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC2108; (1976)3SCC500; [1976]SuppSCR131; [1976]38STC176(SC)
P.K. Goswami, J.1. This judgment will govern both the appeals.2. These two appeals by special leave are directed against the common judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Sales Tax Reference No. 5 of 1969 relating to two periods, namely, (1) from 24th October, 1955 to 31st March, 1956 and (2) from 1st April, 1956 to 31st March, 1957.3. The Tribunal had earlier delivered a common judgment in two revision applications No. 121 and No. 122 of 1961 and made a composite reference to the High Court under the Bombay Sales Tax Act stating the following question for answer:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the three contracts for construction of coaches on the under-frames supplied by the Railway Administration, the contracts containing similar terms were contracts for sale of goods and not works contracts4. The facts appearing from the statement of case are as follows :--5. The respondent, M/s. Variety Body Builders, Baroda, entered into three contracts with the Western R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : I(1996)ACC109; 1995ACJ1021; AIR1995SC2499; (1996)98BOMLR1001; [1996]85CompCas542(SC); JT1995(6)SC155; (1996)1MLJ9(SC); (1995)111PLR375; 1995(5)SCALE2; (1995)5SCC659; [1995]
N.P. Singh, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal has been filed on behalf of the State of Maharashtra and others against the judgment of the High Court holding that the appellant State shall be vicariously liable for payment of compensation to the heirs of the deceased, who was the victim of the accident.3. On 31.3.1980 at about 10.00 P.M. an accident took place opposite S.T. Divisional Office, Ratnagiri in which one Vijay Singh died. At that time the said Vijay Singh was driving the scooter and the jeep which belonged to the State Government dashed against the scooter because of which the victim sustained serious injuries and he ultimately succumbed to those injuries in the hospital. The appellant No. 3 was the driver of the said jeep, but at the time of accident Respondent No. 4 (hereinafter referred so as 'respondent') who was then a clerk in Engineering Fishing Project Division, Ratnagiri, was driving the jeep.4. The Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 filed their claim before the Motor Vehicles T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6767 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP (C) No.6778 of 2012) Deepali Gundu Surwase Appellant versus Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya (D.Ed.) and others Respondents JUDGMENT G.S. SINGHVI, J.1. Leave granted.2. The question which arises for consideration in this appeal filed against order dated 28.9.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench is whether the appellant is entitled to wages for the period during which she was forcibly kept out of service by the management of the school.3. The appellant was appointed as a teacher in Nandanvan Vidya Mandir (Primary School) run by a trust established and controlled by Bagade family. The grant in aid given by the State Government, which included rent for the building was received by Bagade family because the premises belonged to one of its members, namely, Shri Dulichand. In 2005, the Municipal Corporation of Aurangabad raise...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5319 OF2008MACKINON MACKENZIE & COMPANY LTD. ....APPELLANT VERSUS MACKINNON EMPLOYEES UNION ...RESPONDENT JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.The appellant-Company has questioned the correctness of the judgment and order dated 5.05.2006 passed in L.P.A. No.141 of 1996 in Writ Petition No.2733 of 1996 by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, affirming the Award dated 08.03.1996 of the Industrial Court, Mumbai in Complaint (ULP) No.1081 of 1992 raising certain questions of law and urging various grounds in support of the same and prayed to set aside the impugned judgment, order and award of the Industrial Court. The relevant facts are briefly stated to appreciate the rival legal contentions urged on behalf of the parties in this appeal. The appellant-Company was engaged in shipping business from its premises at Mackinnon Building, Ballard Estate, Mumbai. The activities were divided into ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Wylie v. Coxe - 56 U.S. 415 (1853) U.S. Supreme Court Wylie v. Coxe, 56 U.S. 15 How. 415 415 (1853) Wylie v. Coxe 56 U.S. (15 How.) 415 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus Where a contract was made with an attorney for the prosecution of a claim against Mexico for a stipulated proportion of the amount recovered, and services were rendered, Page 56 U. S. 416 the death of the owner of the claim did not dissolve the contract, but the compensation remained a lien upon the money when recovered. A court of equity can exercise jurisdiction over the case if a more adequate remedy can be thus obtained than in a court of law. The want of jurisdiction should have been alleged in the court below, either by plea or answer, if the defendant intended to avail himself of it. It is too late to urge it in an appellate court, unless it appears on the face of the proceedings. This was a bill filed by Mr. Coxe under the circumstances stated...
Tag this Judgment!