Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-06-1968
Reported in : AIR1970Cal1
Ray, J.1. This appeal is from the Judgment and order of Mitter. J. dated 27 July and 24 August 1965 discharging the Rule obtained by the appellant.2. The appellant obtained the Rules requiring the respondent to show cause as to why a writ of Mandamus should not go to recall, rescind and withdraw the order dated 9 October, 1963 and why a writ of Certiorari should not be issued quashing the order dated 9 October, 1963.3. The appellant's case in short is that the appellant was appointed an insurance medical practitioner under the State of West Bengal by virtue of provisions contained in Employees' State Insurance Act. 1948. The appellant further contended that it was a permanent post under the State Government. On 9 October 1963 a letter was written by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of West Bengal addressed to the appellant that 'in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-clause (1) of Clause 11 of Schedule I to the West Bengal Employees' State Insurance (Medical Benefit) Rules, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-13-1968
Reported in : AIR1969Cal253,73CWN533
Bijayesh Mukherji, J. 1. The unsuccessful appellant craves a certificate under Article 133, sub-article (1) of the Constitution for appeal to the Supreme Court.2. The appellant's is a suit, alleging breaches of contracts, one of which is written and the rest are parol, and claiming recovery of Rs. 4,25,343.00. A.N. Ray, J., stays the suit and all proceedings thereunder, because of the written contract's arbitration clause which bears:'Any mutual dispute should be settled in mutual agreement; however, both the contracting parties accept the jurisdiction of the Arbitration by the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris with application of Yugoslav materials and economical law.'The learned Judge dismisses too the appellant's application for injunction restraining the respondent from withdrawing from the Bihar State Electricity Board any money, without keeping a balance of Rs. 4,40,000. The appeals taken against the aforesaid two orders fail. Hence this application for the grant of a ce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-21-1968
Reported in : AIR1969Cal180
S.P. Mitra, J. 1. This matter has been assigned to me under clause 36 of the Letters Patent. P. B. Mukharji. J., and A. N. Sen, J., by their Lordships' order of April 11, 1968, have been pleased to state that their point of disagreement is as follows:-- 'Whether the order or direction of the Government of India contained in the letter dated the 20th June, 1966 and the 7th September, 1966, is unconstitutional or illegal.' 2. In 1933, the petitioner qualified himself for the Indian Civil Service. In 1934, the petitioner, after serving his period of probation, arrived in India and was allotted to Assam, now known as the State of Assam. Between 1938 and 1940 he held the post of Under-Secretary to the Assam Government in the Home (Political) Department. In 1940, the Government of Assam placed the petitioner's services at the disposal of the Government of India and he was appointed to the post of Under-Secretary in the Home Department. In 1947, the petitioner held the post of the Deputy Secr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-26-1968
Reported in : AIR1969Cal363,72CWN872
Ray, J. 1. This appeal is from the judgment and order of Datta, J., dated 23rd April 1908.2. The order was made on the summons dated 4th September 19(37 taken out by Jagannath Gupta and Co. Private Ltd. inter alia for the orders first, that the respondent Mule-hand Gupta the petitioner in Company Petition No. 158 be restrained from taking by himself his servant and agents or otherwise any further proceeding upon the said petition whether by advertising the same or otherwise, secondly, that the said petition be removed from the file of the proceedings and thirdly, for payment of costs.3. In support of the summons there is an affidavit of Bidya Bhusan Gupta affirmed on 4th September 19G7.4. Mulchand Gupta who preferred the Company Petition No. 158 of 1967 filed an affidavit in opposition affirmed on 13th November 1967. Bidya Bhusan Gupta fifed an affidavit in reply affirmed on 20th November 1967. There are further affidavits of Mulchand Gupta affirmed on 27th March 1968 and of Bidya Bhus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-15-1968
Reported in : AIR1969Cal224,74CWN404
ORDERBijayesh Mukherji, J.1. This rule under Section 115 of the Procedure Code (5 of 1908), issued by Chatterjee, J., on April 29, 1968, has, as its genesis, a one-day cricket match played on January 14, 1968, on George Telegraph Sports ground in the Calcutta Maidan, between Belgachia United Club and George Telegraph Sports Club, both the clubs belonging to Group 'E' of the Second Division League. 'Belgachia' --that is how I shorten the full name of the club -- lost the toss and was asked to bat first, which it did, to collect 155 runs for the loss of five wickets, by 12.05 hours, when due to rains, the game 'had to be stopped by the Umpire,' who, however, held no discussion with the Captains of the two competing teams: vide paragraph 9 of the plaint presented by 'Belgachia's' Honorary Secretary. Ujjal Talukdar, qua plaintiff, in the Court of a Munsiff at Sealdah, being suit No. 97 of 1968. 'Belgachia' requested the sole defendant in that suit, Netai Chand Koley, Honorary Secretary, Cr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-28-1968
Reported in : AIR1968Cal582,73CWN169
P.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 109 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act of 1958. 2. The Appellant is the Imperial Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. having its registered office at Virginia House, 37. Chowringhee, Calcutta. The respondents are the Registrar and Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks. 3. The facts are briefly as follows: On 29-2-60 the Appellant made its first application for registration of a trade mark before the Registrar applying for registration as a trade mark of a label bearing the device of snow-clad hills in outline and the word 'Simla' written prominently in various panels of the label. The specification of the goods in the application reads as 'Manufactured tobacco'. This application was for registration of the trade mark in Part A of the Register in Clause 34 The application stated: 'The said trade mark is proposed to be used 'The point is that on 29-2-60 there was no use of the said trade mark and it was only proposed to be used at that point of tim...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-14-1968
Reported in : AIR1968Cal567
Ray, J.1. This appeal is from the order dated 5th September 1967 passed by R.M. Datta. J.2. The order was passed on an interlocutory application filed by the plaintiff for interim maintenance. The plaintiff filed a suit and claimed Rs. 800/- per month for maintenance and residence and also claimed maintenance and educational expenses of the daughter.3. The learned Judge made an order directing the defendant-husband to pay Rs. 160/- per month to the wife by was of interim maintenance pending the decision of the suit and further directed that the sum was to be paid from the month of August, 1967 and thereafter month by month until trial and decision in the suit 4. Counsel for the appellant contended that the Court had no jurisdiction to order interim maintenance, In aid of that contention reliance was placed on the decision in Mahomed Abdul Rahman v. Taiunnissa Begum. : AIR1953Mad420 . Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Padam Sen v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 0...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-01-1968
Reported in : AIR1969Cal149,74CWN1,(1970)ILLJ707Cal
ORDERD. Basu, J.1. This Rule involves a dispute between two sections of the subordinate employees in the office of the Director-General of Ordnance Factories, represented by two Unions.2. The Petitioner is the Employees' Association which represents employees other than stenographers. The 'Stenographers' Association' has been added as Respondent No. 3 at their intervention. Respondent No. 1 is the Union of India and Respondent No. 2 is the Director-General of Ordnance Factories.3. According to the Petitioner Association, the Stenographers are outside the clerical cadre: that there is no Rule authorising the promotion of Stenographers to the grade of Assistants and that the Stenographers had no higher prospects in their career. Administratively, however. Respondents reserved a post of Assistant-in-Charge to be filled up from the cadre of Stenographers of Grade 13 and on the protest of the Petitioner. Respondent No. 2 stated that it was only a 'non-recurring measure' (Annexure A) which h...
Tag this Judgment!