Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1896; (1980)ILLJ137SC; (1980)2SCC593; [1980]2SCR146
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 1212, 2089 and 2237 of 1978. From the Judgment and order dated 15-6-1978 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No. 1150 of 1976. Y.S. Chitale, J.C. Bhatt, A.K. Sen, J.M. Nanavati, D.C. Gandhi, A.G. Menses, K.J. John and K.K. Manchanda for the Appellants in C.A. 1212 and 2237/78 and RR. 1 in CA 2089. V.M. Tarkunde, Y.S. Chitale, P.H. Parekh and N.J. Mehta for the Appellant in CA 2089 and R. 1 in CA 1212. M.C. Bhandare and B. Datta for the Intervener in CA 1212 (Ahmedabad Nagar Employee Union). R.K. Garg, Vimal Dave and Miss Kailash Mehta for the Intervener Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha in CA 1212. The Judgment of V.R. Krishna Iyer, and D.A. Desai, JJ was delivered by Krishna Iyer, J.A.D. Koshal, J. gave a dissenting Opinion. KRISHNA IYER, J.-Every litigation has a moral and, these appeals have many, the foremost being that the economics of law is the essence of labour jurisprudence. The case in a nutshell- An affluent ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC24; 19831SCR145;
1. This reference to the Constitution Bench raises a question in regard to the constitutional validity of death penalty for murder provided in Section 302, Penal Code, and the sentencing procedure embodied in Sub-section (3) of Section 354 of the CrPC, 1973.2. The reference has arisen in these circumstances :Bachan Singh, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 1979, was tried and convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302, Indian Penal Code for the murders of Desa Singh, Durga Bai and Veeran Bai by the Sessions Judge. The High Court confirmed his death sentence and dismissed his appeal.3. Bachan Singh's appeal by special leave, came up for hearing before a Bench of this Court (consisting of Sarkaria and Kailasam, JJ.). The only question for consideration in the appeal was, whether the facts found by the Courts below would be "special reasons" for awarding the death sentence as required under Section 354(3) of the CrPC 1973.4. Shri H.K. Puri, appearing as Amicus Curiae on behal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC916; 1979CriLJ792; (1979)3SCC646; [1979]3SCR78
KRISHNA IYER, J. THE DEADLY QUANDARY To be or not to be: that is the question of lethal import and legal moment, in each of these three appeals where leave is confined to the issue of the propriety of the impost of capital penalty against which the brutal culprits desparately beseech that their dear life be spared by the Summit Court and the incarceratory alternative be awarded instead. There is, as here, a judicial dimension to the quasi-Hamletian dilemma when "a murder most foul" demands of sentencing justice punitive infliction of death or the lesser punishment of life imprisonment, since the Penal Code leaves the critical choice between physical liquidation and life-long incarceration to the enlightened conscience and sensitized judgment of the Court. A narration of facts is normally necessary at this early stage but we relegate it to a later part, assuming for the nonce the monstrosity the murder in each case. Is mere shock at the horrendous killing sufficient alibi to extinguish ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1457; (1978)3SCC558; [1979]1SCR122
Krishna Iyer, J.1. What are we about A raging rain of writ-petitions by hundreds of merchants of intoxicants hit by a recently amended rule declaring a break of two 'dry' days in every 'wet' week for licensed liquor shops and other institutions of inebriation in the private sector, puts in issue the constitutionality of Section 59(f)(v) and Rule 37 of the Punjab Excise Act and Liquor Licence (Second Amendment) Rules, (hereinafter, for short, the Act and the Rules). The tragic irony of the legal plea is that Article 14 and 19 of the very Constitution, which, in Article 47, makes it a fundamental obligation of the State to bring about prohibition of intoxicating drinks, is pressed into service to thwart the State's half-hearted prohibitionist gesture. Of course, it is on the cards that the end may be good but the means may be bad, constitutionally speaking. And there is a mystique about legalese beyond the layman's ken !2. To set the record straight, we must state, right here, that no fr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
City of Lafayette v. Louisiana P&L; Co. - 435 U.S. 389 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court City of Lafayette v. Louisiana P&L; Co., 435 U.S. 389 (1978) City of Lafayette v. Louisiana Power & Light Co. No. 76-864 Argued October 4, 1977 Decided March 29, 1978 435 U.S. 389 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Petitioner cities, which own and operate electric utility systems both within and beyond their respective city limits as authorized by Louisiana law, brought an action in District Court against respondent investor-owned electric utility with which petitioners compete, alleging that it committed various federal antitrust offenses that injured petitioners in the operation of their electric utility systems. Respondent counterclaimed, alleging that petitioners had committed various antitrust offenses that injured respondent in its business and property. Petitioners moved to dismiss the counterclaim on the ground that, as cities and subdivision...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC597; (1978)1SCC248; [1978]2SCR621
M.H. Beg, C.J.1. The case before us involves questions relating to basic human rights. On such questions I believe that multiplicity of views giving the approach of each member of this Court is not a disadvantage if it clarifies our not infrequently differing approaches. It should enable all interested to appreciate better the significance of our Constitution.2. As I am in general agreement with my learned brethren Bhagwati and Krishna Iyer. I will endeavour to confine my observations to an indication of my own approach on some matters for consideration now before us. This seems to me to be particularly necessary as my learned brother Kailasam, who has also given us the benefit of his separate opinion, has a somewhat different approach. I have had the advantage of going through the opinions of each of my three learned brethren.3. It seems to me that there can be little doubt that the right to travel and to go outside the country, which orders regulating issue, suspension or impounding,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC2328; (1977)GLR919; (1977)0GLR90; 1977LabIC1857; (1977)4SCC193; [1978]1SCR423
1. We have heard the learned Attorney-General and Mr. Seervai fully on the various points arising in this appeal. We will deal with the arguments of the learned Counsel later by a considered judgment or judgments. For the present we will only say that since we are informed that the parties to the appeal have arrived at a settlement, the appeal shall stand disposed of in terms of that settlement. Those terms are as follows:On the facts and circumstances on record the present government do not consider that there was any justification for transferring Justice Sheth from Gujarat High Court and propose to transfer him back to that High Court.On this statement being made by the learned Attorney-General, Mr. Seervai Counsel for respondent No. 1 (Justice S.H. Sheth) withdraws the writ petition with leave of the Court.The following Opinions were delivered:Chandrachud, J. This appeal by certificate involves the question as to the constitutionality of a notification issued by the President of In...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Nixon v. Administrator of General Services - 433 U.S. 425 (1977) U.S. Supreme Court Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 425 (1977) Nixon v. Administrator of General Services No. 75-1605 Argued April 20, 1977 Decided June 28, 1977 433 U.S. 425 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus After appellant had resigned as President of the United States, he executed a depository agreement with the Administrator of General Services that provided for the storage near appellant's California home of Presidential materials (an estimated 42 million pages of documents and 880 tape recordings) accumulated during appellant's terms of office. Under this agreement, neither appellant nor the General Services Administration (GSA) could gain access to the materials without the other's consent. Appellant was not to withdraw any original writing for three years, although he could make and withdraw copies. After the initial three-year period...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC1605; [1977]107ITR938(SC); (1977)2SCC378; [1977]3SCR153
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave directed against the judgment of the Delhi High Court answering in favour of the Revenue a question which was directed to be referred by the Tribunal under Section 66(2) of the Indian I. T. Act, 1922. The controversy between the parties arises out of an assessment made on the assessee as a Hindu Undivided Family for the assessment year 1948-49 the corresponding accounting year being the financial year 1947-48. The assessee was at the material time a Hindu Undivided Family with one Roshan Lal as its manager and karta. Till June 1947 the assessee was carrying on business in gold and jewellery at Chowk Surjan Singh in Lahore. In view of the pending partition of India Roshan Lal decided to move out of Lahore and accordingly he transferred a sum of Rs. 12,094/-from the account of the assessee with the Lahore Branch of the Punjab. National Bank Ltd. to the New Delhi Branch of that bank in June 1947. He also transferred from the Lahore Br...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1977)ILLJ161Mad
Mohan, J.1. This writ petition is to quash the order dated 30th July, 1976 made by the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Madras-5 (first respondent) in Lay-Off Application No 2 of 1916.2. The short facts are as follows : The petitioner is engaged in engineering industry and has among others, a plant called Plant No. II at Sembiam, Madras-11.3. Amendment to the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Parent Act) was enacted by the Parliament called the Industrial Disputes Amendment Act of 1976 Central Act 32 of 1976)(hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act). One of the sections introduced by the Amendment Act was Section 25M. The broad feature of Section 25M was that it required an establishment covered by the new Chapter V (B) within which the establishment should apply for permission to effect lay-off of its workmen when such lay-off was due to shortage of power or natural calamities. By Sub-section (2) of Section 25M it was provided where workmen of such establishmen...
Tag this Judgment!