Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1977Bom99
Masodkar, J. 1. These 2661 cases have clogged the Court's corridors for considerable time, challenging the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (Act No. 27 of 1961) as amended by the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Lowering of Ceiling on Holdings) and (Amendment) Act, 1972 (Act No. 21 of 1975) Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Lowering of Ceiling on Holdings) (Amendment) Amendment Act, 1975 (Act No. 47 of 1975) and the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) (Amendment) Act, 1975 (Act No. 2 of 1976).2. The petitioners raised almost Common questions and the petitions can be decided by an order indicating separate points urged in support of different petitioners' claims. It is assumed and not disputed that the petitioner in each petition is aggrieved by the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling On Holdings) Act, 1961 (Act No. 27 of 1961) as amended and in issue.3. At the outset it must be stated that in Special Ci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Hamling v. United States - 418 U.S. 87 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87 (1974) Hamling v. United States No. 73-507 Argued April 15, 1974 Decided June 24, 1974 418 U.S. 87 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Petitioners were convicted of mailing and conspiring to mail an obscene advertising brochure with sexually explicit photographic material relating to their illustrated version (hereafter Illustrated Report) of an official report on obscenity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2, 371, and 1461. The indictment under 1461 charged petitioners in the language of the statute, which provides in pertinent part that obscene material and written information as to where it may be obtained is nonmailable, and that "[w]hoever knowingly uses the mails for the mailing . . . of anything declared by this section . . . to be nonmailable . . ." commits a crime. The jury was unable to reach a verdict on the counts charging...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1974SC1764; (1975)3SCC351; [1975]1SCR57
K.K. Mathew, J.1. This is an appeal, on the basis of a certificate, by the first defendant, from a decree in a suit for partition of the assets of one Dr. Krishnan who died in England on October 18, 1950, according to the provisions of the Travancore Ezhava Act and the dispute between the parties now is concerned with the question of succession to the sale proceeds of the movables and other moneys included in Schedule-C to the plaint.2. Krishnan had two brothers, namely, Padmanabhan and Govindan, the first defendant, and a sister, the second defendant. Krishnan went to England in 1920 for higher studies in medicine. For some time his father helped him with money but, after the father's death, his elder brother Padmanabhan did not send him any money and, therefore, Krishnan had to find his own resources for prosecuting his studies. He received considerable encouragement and financial help for carrying on his studies from an elderly English lady by name Miss Hepworth. When Krishnan becam...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1977)79BOMLR581
Rege, J.1. This is a petition by certain shareholders of the National Rayon Corporation Limited (respondent No. 7) for a writ of mandamus for withdrawing or cancelling the order dated June 25, 1973 made by the Company Law Board (respondent No. 2) appointing respondents Nos. 5 and 6 as Government Directors for one year from June 30, 1973 on the Board of Directors of respondent No. 7 company and for declaring the same to be void and inoperative. They have also asked for a further writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the said impugned order and also for a declaration that certain directors mentioned in prayer (c) had been duly elected at the annual general meeting of respondent No. 7 company held on May 11, 1973 and that they were entitled to act as Directors of respondent No. 7 company.2. The short facts leading to this petition may be stated as follows:3. Respondent No. 7 company, namely, the National Rayon Corporation Ltd., was incorporated in 1946. The present subscribed shar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1974)76BOMLR552; (1974)IILLJ441Bom; 1974MhLJ845
Tulzapurkar, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by one Ramesh Krishna Rao (original petitioner) against the judgment and order passed by Vimadalal, J. on July 24, 1969, whereby the learned Judge dismissed his petition being Misc. Petition No. 563 of 1967. 2. A few facts giving rise to the filing of the petition may be stated : The petitioner was appointed as a probationary assistant in the State Bank of India (respondent No. 1) with effect from November 3, 1959. When that post was offered to him on October 30, 1959 the petitioner was furnished with the cyclostyled copy of the State Bank of India (Officers and Assistants) Service Rules governing his services in the Bank and was informed that he will be required to sign the declaration in form 'A' appended to the Rules. By His letter dated November 3, 1959 he accepted the appointment and as required by Rules he paid a sum Rs. 1,000 as and by way of security deposit and signed the requisite declaration in the prescribed form 'A' agreeing...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (1977)IILLJ227AP
Venkatarama Sastry, J.1. This appeal has been referred to a Division Bench by our learned brother Madhava Rao, J., as in his opinion an important question as to the interpretation of the word 'employee' in a factory, in view of the amendment of Sub-section (9) of Section 2 of the Employees' State Insurance Act XXXIV of 1948, hereinafter referred to as the Act, arises in this case.2. The facts necessary for the purpose of this appeal are the following: The respondents before us M/s Krishna Bottlers Private Ltd., represented by its managing director, Lieutenant Col. Sanjeeva Rao, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad, filed an application under Section 75 of the Act making the following averments:3. The petitioner bottles and sells soft $ called 'Coca Cola' and 'Fanta' in $ State of Andhra Pradesh. Their factory is at Hyderabad where the said drinks are bottled. Its various depots arc at various places. The factory at Hyderabad is engaged in manufacturing process. The petitioner is paying the Employe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Human Rel. Comm'n - 413 U.S. 376 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Human Rel. Comm'n, 413 U.S. 376 (1973) Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations No. 72-419 Argued March 20, 1973 Decided June 21, 1973 413 U.S. 376 CERTIORARI TO THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Syllabus Following a complaint and hearing, respondent Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations held that petitioner had violated a city ordinance by using an advertising system in its daily newspaper whereby employment opportunities are published under headings designating job preference by sex. On appeal from affirmance of the Commission's cease and desist order, the court below barred petitioner from referring to sex in employment headings, unless the want ads placed beneath them relate to employment opportunities not subject to the ordinance's prohibition against sex discrimination. Petitioner contends that the ordinance contravenes its constitu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1461; (1973)4SCC225; [1973]SuppSCR1
1. I propose to divide my judgment into eight parts. Part I will deal with Introduction; Part II with interpretation of Golakhnath case; Part III with the interpretation of the original Article 368, as it existed prior to its amendment; Part IV with the validity of the Constitution (Twenty-fourth Amendment) Act; Part V with the validity of Section 2 of the Constitution (Twenty-fifth Amendment) Act; Part VI with the validity of Section 3 of the Constitution (Twenty-fifth Amendment) Act; Part VII with Constitution (Twenty- ninth Amendment) Act; and Part VIII with conclusions.PART I-Introduction2. All the six writ petitions involve common questions as to the validity of the Twenty- fourth, Twenty-fifth and Twenty-ninth Amendments of the Constitution. I may give a few facts in Writ petition No. 135 of 1970 to show how the question arises in this petition. Writ Petition No. 135 of 1970 was filed by the petitioner on March 21, 1970 under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of his ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Doe v. Bolton - 410 U.S. 179 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973) Doe v. Bolton No. 70-40 Argued December 13, 1971 Reargued October 11, 1972 Decided January 22, 1973 410 U.S. 179 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA Syllabus Georgia law proscribes an abortion except as performed by a duly licensed Georgia physician when necessary in "his best clinical judgment" because continued pregnancy would endanger a pregnant woman's life or injure her health; the fetus would likely be born with a serious defect; or the pregnancy resulted from rape. 26-1202(a) of Ga. Criminal Code. In addition to a requirement that the patient be a Georgia resident and certain other requirements, the statutory scheme poses three procedural conditions in 26-1202(b): (1) that the abortion be performed in a hospital accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals (JCAH); (2) that the procedure be approved by the hospi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1973]31STC456(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner is a dealer in water pumping sets. It has been urged by the petitioners that these pumping sets are agricultural implements and, as such, are liable to tax under the U. P. Sales Tax Act at 2 per cent. The sales tax department, on the other hand, treats these pumping sets as machinery and has taxed their turnover at 6 per cent. In Delta Engineering Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1963] 14 S.T.C. 515, a Division Bench of this court has held that centrifugal pumps fixed in tube-wells are not agricultural implements. Another Division Bench in Chandra Metal Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax Sales Tax Reference No. 273 of 1963 decided on 23rd December, 1965 has held that pumping sets are not agricultural implements. The Division Bench, before whom this petition came up for hearing, thought that the aforesaid two decisions of this court might require reconsideration and hence referred the case to a lar...
Tag this Judgment!