Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-12-1958
Reported in : AIR1959P& H352; [1960]30CompCas300(P& H)
ORDERTek Chand, J.1. This is a petition under Section 38 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, which is analogous to Section 155 of the Companies Act of 1956. There aretwo petitioners. The first petitioner Bhagat Singh claimed to have 41 shares of Rs. 100/- each in the'Piar Bus Service Limited, Amritsar. This amount, he claimed to have paid by giving to the Company two motor lorries of the value of Rs. 4,100/- and heclaims himself to be a holder of fully paid up shares.2. The second petitioner is Hardev Singh who had acquired 100 shares of the Company of the value of Rs. 100/- each and had paid the entire amount of Rs. 10,000/- on these shares. The grievance of the two petitioners is that their respective shares were illegally forfeited by the Company and they were transferred to respondents Nos. 2 to 4 andtheir names have been scored out from the register of members of the Company. They have prayedthat this Court should pass an order directing the respondent-Company to enter the names of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-15-1958
Reported in : AIR1962AP63
Chandra Reddy, C.J.(1) This is an appeal against the Judgement of the Additional District Judge, East Godavari, directing execution of a decree to proceed.(2) The respondent, the South India Cooperative Insurance Society, Ltd. now represented by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, South Zone, United India Life Buildings, Madras, obtained a decree on the foot of a mortgage executed in their favour on 7-2-1941 for a sum of Rs. 7,500/-. This decree was passed under S. 51 of the Madras Co-operative Societies Act on 3-5-1954 on a reference to the Arbitrator by the Registrar. Shortly thereafter, execution was levied before the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies. This was dismissed on 15-1-1954 for reasons which need not be narrated here. Subsequently an application is alleged to have been filed before the Deputy Registrar for transmission of the decree to the District Munsif's Court, RaJahmundry in February, 1957. Accordingly, the Deputy Registrar transferred it to that court fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-07-1958
Reported in : AIR1959Cal785
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners were employed in various life insurance companies and became workers employed by Life Insurance Corporation of India after its incorporation. It is stated that the petitioners are now receiving basic monthly pay at various rates ranging from Rs. 50/- to Rs. 150/- per month. The complaint made in this application is that they are not being paid dear-ness allowance, although according to the orders made under the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) they are entitled to receive the same. Reference has been made to Section 11 of the Act. Under Sub-section (1) of Section 11, every whole-time employee of an insurer, whose controlled business has been transferred to and vested in the Corporation, becomes an employee of the Corporation and would be entitled to the same remuneration and the same terms and conditions upon which he was being employed until his employment in the Corporation is terminated or until his remun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-23-1958
Reported in : AIR1958Mad343; (1958)1MLJ367
..... proceed to analyse them, to determine the precise degree of control and examine whether the amount of control established the identity of the corporation as part of the government.12. the preamble to the enactment, act xxxi of 1956, recited:an act to provide for the nationalisation of life insurance business in india by transferring all such business to a corporation established for the purpose and to provide for the regulation and control of the business of the corporation and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.13. section 3 provided for the establishment of a corporation called the life insurance corporation of india:a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal with power to acquire, hold and dispose of property and which can by its ..... with the state or be treated as the servant or agent of the state.43. the learned advocate-general referred us to section 2(a)(1) of the industrial disputes act where a reference is made to the central government as being the appropriate government in relation to disputes concerning an industry 'carried on by or under the authority of the central government'. phrases of the same type occur in the definition of 'employer' in section 2(g) of that act but these do not advance the position. we are unable to hold that the mere fact that the provisions of the industrial disputes act are made applicable to public corporations or that the central government are designated the appropriate authority in such .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-08-1958
Reported in : AIR1959Cal695,63CWN439
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by the Life Insurance Corporation of India under Sections 397, 398, 399 and 402 and 403 of the Companies Act, 1956, for an order that the Special Officer already appointed hereunder may be authorised to enter into an arrangement with the State Bank of India by which all the accounts now standing in the name of Richardson and Cruddas Ltd., may be consolidated into one account and to operate the said account or any other account that may be opened in the said Bank either himself or through a person or persons duly authorised and to execute all documents necessary for confirming the existing mortgage, hypothecation agreement and cash credit agreement with the said Bank and also to execute such other supplemental documents for the purpose of giving effect to the agreement by which the Government of India will guarantee the indebtedness of Richardson and Cruddas Ltd. to the said Bank to the extent of Rs. 95,00,000/-. There can be no objection ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-05-1958
Reported in : (1959)IILLJ435Bom
1. This is a reference by the Government of Bombay under S. 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for adjudication of a dispute between the Standard Vacuum Company of India, Ltd., Bombay, and the workmen employed in refineries under it over the following demand :- 'The contract system for cleaning the premises and plant should be abolished and workers working in the refinery or for the Refinery through the Ramji Gordhan and Company should be treated as workers of the Standard Vaccum Refining Company of India, Ltd., Bombay, and wage-scales, conditions of service, etc., that are applicable to the workers of the refinery be made applicable to them. Past service of these workers should be counted and they should be treated as continuously in the service of the Stanvac Refinery from the date of their entertainment.' 2. In the statement of claim, filed by the Petroleum Refineries Employees' Sabha, it is stated that the sabha has as its members a majority of the workmen employed by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-03-1958
Reported in : AIR1959SC82; [1959]35ITR298(SC); [1959]Supp1SCR45
Gajendragadkar, J.1. These are appeals by special leave and they arise from the assessment proceedings taken against the appellant's husband Seth Ganga Sagar Jatia in respect of his income forth assessment year 1943-44 and 1944-45. The said Seth Ganga Sagar died on September 22, 1944, leaving behind him his widow the appellant Shrimati Indermani Jatia. After the death of her husband, the appellant contained the assessment proceedings as his representative and administrator of his estate. The appellant as well as her husband were residents and ordinarily residents in British India for the relevant years. The sources of the assessee's income for the purposes of Income-tax assessment were his business, his house property and the dividends earned by him. This business was carried on by the appellant after his death at Khurja and Aligarh which are part of India and at Chistian in the Indian State of Bahawalpur now a part of Pakistan. The central set of accounts of the assessee's business we...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-22-1958
Reported in : AIR1960Cal779,[1960]30CompCas306(Cal),64CWN161
ORDERH.K. Bose, J.1. This matter comes up before me by way of an application for exception, to a report dated 12-2-1957 made by the Assistant Referee of this Court in a reference directed by a consent decree passed by Bachawat J. on 20-1-1954. The consent decree, however, reserved the consideration of all further directions and of the question whether the plaintiff Bank is entitled to any decree in terms of prayers (e), (f), (g) and (h) of the plaint in the suit in which the said consent decree was passed and also the question o cost of the reference and of the suit.2. The report of the Assistant Referee shows that in course of the hearing of the reference the parties came to certain terms of settlement and it is on the basis of these terms of settlement that the reference was disposed of. By the terms of settlement the parties agreed that a sum of Rs. 52,480/12/-was the amount due from the defendant Andhar Manick Tea Co. Ltd. to the plaintiff Nath Bank (in liquidation) but it is provi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-27-1958
Reported in : (1959)ILLJ297Bom
Acts/Rules/Orders: Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 12(5)AWARD1. This industrial dispute between the Murphy Radio of India, Ltd., Bombay, and the workmen employed under it, was referred to me for adjudication under Sub-section (5) of S. 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, by Government of Bombay, Labour and Social Welfare Department, Order No. AJM. 7558, dated 16 May 1958. The demand of the workmen is as follows :- 'All the employees who have served the company during the year 1958 shall be paid bonus for the year 1956 equivalent to 50 per cent (fifty per cent) of their total earnings during the said year unconditionally. The bonus should be paid to all employees irrespective of whether they are at present in the service of the company or not. Bonus already declared and paid may be deducted from the above bonus demand.' 2. In the statement of claim filed by the secretary of the union it is stated that ever since the commencement of this concern it has been enjoying continue...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-15-1958
Reported in : AIR1959Mad181; (1958)2MLJ449
ORDERBalakrishna Ayyar, J. 1. This is a petition by the Vanguard Fire and General Insurance Co., Ltd. for the issue of a writ of prohibitions to restrain the first respondent from carrying on any investigation into the affairs of the company in pursuance of an order made under Section 33 of the Insurance Act by the Central Government. 2. The relevant facts are these; The petitioner company was incorporated on 25-9-1941 and came under the purview of the Insurance Act of 1938. The company applied for and obtained certificates of registration for carrying on various classes of insurance business. On 15-10-1956 there was an Extraordinary General Meeting of the shareholders of the company at which four resolutions were passed. By the first it was resolved; 'that the company do forthwith cease to carry on business as insurers in respect of fire, motor, marine, and accident and other general insurance business.' The second resolution required the Directors 'to stop the carrying on the busine...
Tag this Judgment!