Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1950]SuppSCR317
Kania, C.J.1. I have read the judgments prepared by Messrs Fazl Ali, Mahajan and Mukherjea, JJ., in this case. As the views in those judgments in respect of the nature of the duties and functions of the Industrial Tribunal do not show agreement I consider it necessary to add a few words of my own. 2. In my opinion, the functions and duties of the Industrial Tribunal are very much like those of a body discharging judicial functions, although it is not a Court. The rules framed by the Tribunal required evidence to be taken and witnesses to be examined, cross-examined and re-examined. The Act constituting the Tribunal imposes penalties for incorrect statements made before the Tribunal. While the powers of the Industrial Tribunal in some respects are different from those of an ordinary Civil Court and it has jurisdiction and powers to give reliefs which a Civil Court administering the law of the land (for instance, ordering the re-instatement of a workman) does not possess in the discharge...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1950]SuppSCR245
Fazl Ali, J.1. The question raised in this case relates to the validity of section 7(1) (c) of the East Punjab Public Safety Act, 1949 (as extended to the Province of Delhi), which runs as follows :- 'The Provincial Government or any authority authorised by it in this behalf if satisfied that such action is necessary for the purpose of preventing or combating any activity prejudicial to the public safety or the maintenance of public order may, by order in writing addressed to a printer, publisher or editor - * * * * * *(c) require that any matter relating to a particular subject or class or subjects shall before publication be submitted for scrutiny'; 2. It should be noted that the provisions of sub-clause (c) are not in general terms but are confined to a 'particular subject or class of subject.' and that having regard to the context in which these words are used, they must be connected with 'public safety or the maintenance of public order.' 3. The Petitioners, on whose behalf this ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1950SC11; 1978(2)ELT284(SC); [1950]1SCR15
Kania, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court at Nagpur, made on a reference under Section 83(2) of the Central Provinces Municipalities Act II of the 1922, by the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Nagpur. The appellant is a trader in Kamptee who manufactures bidis. On the 30th of November, 1945, he brought to Kamptee from outside tobacco to make bidis. A declaration form signed on his behalf stated that the 254 bags of tobacco liable to octroi duty, which had that day arrived at octroi post No. 3, had been brought for use and consumption within the limits of the Municipality. He however put on record his protest against the recovery of the duty which was fixed at Rs. 1,128-2-0. Against the order claiming the amount, the appellant filed an appeal to the Extra Assistant Commissioner with revenue appellate powers, Nagpur. He contended that the municipality claimed to levy the duty under Section 66(1)(e) of the Municipal Act, but they had no right to do so as u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1950SC6; [1950]1SCR25
Fazl Ali, J.1. The only question to be decided in this appeal, which arises out of an execution proceeding, is whether the decree under execution is barred by limitation. The first court held that the decree was not barred, but the High Court has come to the opposite conclusion, and the decree-holder has, after obtaining a certificate under Section 110 of the Civil Procedure Code, appealed to this Court. 2. The facts may be briefly stated as follows. On the 21st August, 1940, a preliminary mortgage decree was passed ex parte in a suit instituted by the appellant to enforce a mortgage. On the 19th September, 1940, the judgment-debtor made an application under Order IX, rule, 13, of the Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the ex parte decree, but this application was rejected on the 7th June, 1941. On the 11th July, 1941, the judgment-debtor filed an application under Section 36 of the Bengal Moneylenders Act, for reopening the preliminary decree, but this application was dismissed fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1950SC1; (1950)52BOMLR521; (1950)IIMLJ344(SC); [1950]1SCR75; [1950]SuppSCR75
Mahajan, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Bombay dated 9th March 1943, and made in Second Appeal No. 717 of 1940 varying the decree of the Assistant Judge, Ahmedabad, in Appeal No. 173 of 1936 reversing the decree of the Joint Sub-Judge, Ahmedabad, in Suit No. 830 of 1933. 2. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the respondent firm in ejectment to recover possession of survey Nos. 222, 223, 225 and 226 situate in Rampura in Ahmedabad district and for mesne profits, as early as July, 1933, and during its 17 years' span of life it had a somewhat chequered career. Those responsible for drawing up the pleadings did not take pains to comprehend correctly as to what they were about and the whole litigation was conducted in a slovenly and slipshod manner. Evidence which should have been produced at the beginning was allowed to be produced at a much later stage after the case went back on remand and the suit was determined by the Assista...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1950]SuppSCR102
Mukherjea, J.1. These sixteen appeals arise out of as many applications presented by the different appellants under section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code, complaining of illegal detention under section 2 (1) (a) of the Bihar Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1949. 2. The appellants were originally arrested under the Bihar Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1947. That Act, which received the assent of the Governor-General on 15th of March, 1947, was to remain operative under section 1 (3) of the Act for a period of one year only from the date of its commencement, subject to a proviso engrafted upon the sub- section itself, which empowered the Provisional Government to extend it, with or without modifications, for a further period of one year, by means of a notification, on a resolution being passed to that effect by the Bihar Legislative Assembly and agreed to by the Bihar Legislative Council. On the 11th of March, 1948, the Provincial Government of Bihar, in exercise of their p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1950SC172; (1950)52BOMLR745; [1950]20CompCas179(SC); [1950]1SCR391
Kania, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the decision of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The respondent company was incorporated in 1908 with an authorised capital of Rs. 10 lakhs divided into 10,000 shares of Rs. 100 each. By 1945, 5,404 shares were subscribed and Rs. 25 per share were called on each of them. Four thousand five hundred and ninetysix shares out of the authorised capital thus remained unissued. From about July, 1944, Mr. Padampat Singhania, a businessman interested in many companies, began to purchase shares of the company from the holders thereof on a large scale. This naturally put up the price of the shares considerably. On the 18th September, 1944, at a board meeting of the directors the chairman drew attention of his co-directors to the attempt thus made by an outsider to corner the shares of the company. In pursuance of a resolution passed at the meeting, the chairman issued a circular to the existing shareholders acquainting them of the true position and sugg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1950SC155; 1950CriLJ1153; [1950]1SCR573
Patanjali Sastri, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from an order of the High Court at Allahabad dismissing an application under sections 491 and 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure for release of the appellant who was arrested in pursuance of an extradition warrant issued by the Regional Commissioner of the United State of Rajasthan who is the principal officer representing the Crown in the territory of that State. 2. The appellant who is a member of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service was appointed in 1948 to serve what was then known as the Tonk State in various capacities and during such service he is alleged to have helped the Nawab in obtaining the sanction of the Government of India to the payment of Rs. 14 lakhs to the Nawab out of the State Treasury for the discharge of his debts, and to have induced the Nawab by threats and deception to pay the appellant, in return for such help, sums totalling Rs. 3 lakhs on various dates. On these allegations the appellant is charged ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1950SC27; 1950CriLJ1383; (1950)IIMLJ42(SC); [1950]1SCR88
1. This is a petition by the applicant under article 32(1) of the Constitution of India for a writ of habeas corpus against his detention in the Madras Jail. In the petition he has given various dates showing how he has been under detention since December, 1947. Under the ordinary Criminal Law he was sentenced to terms of imprisonment but those convictions were set aside. While he was thus under detention under one of the orders of the Madras State Government, on the 1st of March, 1950, he was served with an order made under section 3(1) of the Preventive Detention Act, IV of 1950. He challenges the legality of the order as it is contended that Act IV of 1950 contravenes the provisions of articles 13, 19 and 21 and the provisions of that Act are not in accordance with article 22 of the Constitution. He has also challenged the validity of the order on the ground that it is issued mala fide. The burden of proving that allegation is on the applicant. Because of the penal provisions of sec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1950SC188; (1950)NULLLLJ921SC; (1950)ILLJ921SC; [1950]1SCR459
Kania, C.J.1. I have read the judgments prepared by Messrs. Fazl Ali, Mahajan and Mukherjea JJ. in this case. As the views in those judgments in respect of the nature of the duties and functions of the Industrial Tribunal do not show agreement I consider it necessary to add a few words of my own. 2. In my opinion, the functions and duties of the Industrial Tribunal are very much like those of a body discharging judicial functions, although it is not a Court. The rules framed by the Tribunal require evidence to be taken and witnesses to be examined, cross-examined and re-examined. The Act constituting the Tribunal imposes penalties for incorrect statements made before the Tribunal. While the powers of the Industrial Tribunal in some respects are different from those of an ordinary civil court and it has jurisdiction and powers to give reliefs which a civil Court administering the law of the land (for instance, ordering the reinstatement of a workman) does not possess in the discharge of...
Tag this Judgment!