Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1959Kant158; AIR1959Mys158; 1959CriLJ746
ORDER1. The respondent before me filed Order P. No. 117/1956 before the Court of the District Munsiff of Puttur, South Kanara, under Seections, 195and 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying that the Court may be pleased to make a complaint against the petitioners before me for offences-said to have been committed by them under Sections 193, 209, 467 and 471 read with Sections 34 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The allegations in support of this application are that a certain lease deed, on the strength of which Original south No. 391/1952 was filed by the second petitioner before me against the respondent in the District Munsiffs Court of Puttur, was fabricated by the first petitioner in connivance with the other petitioners and that he also made petitioners 3 and 4 to give false evidence in support of it. The suit had been dismissed on the finding that the lease deed in question was false.This petition was filed on 26-10-1956. Notice-returnable 19-11-1956 was issued to the respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP43; (1959)IILLJ187MP
H.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is an application by a Sub-Inspector of Police who was dismissed by the Order of the Deputy Inspector General Police, Northern Range (M. B.) after show cause notices, inquiry and report by the S. P. Guna. The gravamen of his case is that because he was appointed by the I. G. of Police of the erstwhile Gwalior State, and after the constitution of the Madhya Bharat confirmed by that Government in its services, his dismissal by the D. I. G. is illegal and in contravention of Article 311(1) of the Constitution as this authority is subordinate in rank both to the State Government and to the I. G. of Police Madhya Bharat.He has also urged that the conduct of the inquiry was in contravention of the provisions of the Punishment and Appeal Rules, the Madhya Bharat Police Act and Police Regulations (paragraph 234). Accordingly, he has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the D. I. G., and directing the grant of all consequential reliefs.2. The m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC1012; (1958)IILLJ492SC
P.B. Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal by special leave arises out of an industrial dispute between the appellant, M/s. D. Macropollo and Co. (Private) Ltd., and Respondent No. 1, its workmen as represented by D. Macropollo and Co. (Private)Ltd., Employees' Union. On 31-5-1957, this dispute was referred to the First Labour Court by the Government of West Bengal under Sub-section 7 and 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act (No. XIV of 1947). The two questions which were referred to the Labour Court were:(1) Is the termination of services of the fourteen workmen (whose names were given in the reference) justified? and(2) what relief were the discharged employees entitled to?Before the Labour Court, the Employees' Union urged that the discharge of the fourteen employees amounted to an act of victimisation and unfair labour practice. On the other hand, the appellant urged that the discharged employees were not workmen within the meaning of the Act and so the reference made by the Government of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1959Kant65; AIR1959Mys65; 1959CriLJ347; (1958)36MysLJ744
ORDERA. Narayana Pai, J.1. This revision petition raises an intricate point regarding the interpretation and effect Of Section 198-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure introduced for the first time by the amending Act XXVI of 1955. There is only one reported decision of a single Judge of the Bombay High Court dealing with this Section and that is found reported in C.B.L. Bhatnagar v. The State, : AIR1958Bom196 . The observations made in that judgment are relied upon by both sides in support of their respective contentions, although the decision itself does not finally conclude the controversy now before me for decision.2. The undisputed facts may be stated briefly. In the wake of the reorganization of States in 1956 there were some disturbances in Belgaum in consequence of which orders were issued under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code and also under Section 37(1) of the Bombay Police Act by the District Magistrate of Belgaum. Breaches of these orders were committed or attempt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959AP279
1. The problem posed here is whether the process fee payable for service of notice on the respondent is the one governed by the rules framed by the erstwhile Hyderabad High Court or those of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. So far as the case on hand is concerned, it does not present any difficulty for the reason that the appeal itself was filed after 1-11-1956 i.e., a few days after the Appellate Side Rules were promulgated by virtue of the powers conferred by the enactments mentioned in Schedule I thereto and all other powers thereunto enabling. 1t was admitted on 7-12-1956 and steps were taken to serve the sole respondent on 8-7-1958. In such a situation, this apppeal as well as all proceedings arising therefrom are governed only by the appellate Side made after 1-11-1958.2. But the vital question is whether these rules would apply to appeals filed before the formation of the Andnra Pradesh High Court and during the existence of the erstwhile Hyderabad High Court. It is argued, by the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1961Kant181; AIR1961Mys181; ILR1960KAR211
Somnath Iyer, J. 1. The petitioner was employed by the Guledgud City Municipality on March 19, 1939 as a Naka Rakhavaldar on salary of Rs. 13/- per month. In the year 1941, he was transferred as a Sanitary Mukadam in the Sanitary Department of the same Municipality. 2. On December 16, 1943, be was accused or having used service stamps for a communication addressed on behalf of the Municipality to a Municipal Councillor whereas he should have used only the ordinary postage stamps. He having been found guilty of such misuse of those service stamps, was dismissed from, service. 3. By an order made by the Chief Officer on April 29, 1944, be was again appointed as a Sanitary Mukadam in the same Municipality on a pay of Rs. 15/- per mensem, with effect from May 1, 1944. The petitioner was directed to join the post on that date and take charge of it. 4. The petitioner joined that appointment and appears to have made a representation to the Municipality that he should be given his salary for t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR20
M.C. Chagla, C.J.1. When Mr. Justice M.C. Shah and Mr. Justice Baxi of the Saurashtra High Court heard First Appeal No. 12 of 1952, certain important questions of law arose before them and they thought it necessary to refer those questions to a Full Bench. This matter has now come before us.2. In order to understand the question that we have to decide, a few facts must be stated. The plaintiff is the second son of the ex-Ruler of Sayla and on July 21, 1945, the Thakore Saheb of Sayla, the then Ruler, agreed to give to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 30,000 in lieu of residence and this caine to be given under the following circumstances. The Thakore Saheb was the karta of an impartible estate and both under the custom and the rule of Hindu law the impartible estate would go to his eldest son, but the younger sons have a right of maintenance and residence. Certain provision was made with regard to the maintenance of the plaintiff, but with regard to the residence, that claim was commuted for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1959]10STC531(Kar)
ORDERDas Gupta, C.J. 1. The only question raised in this petition is whether or not it was competent for the Board of Revenue to transfer proceedings pending before it for restoration of review petition, which was dismissed for default, to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. 2. The matter arises in this way :- The petitioner before us was subjected to an assessment order made for the year 1953-54 by the Sales Tax Officer, Bellary. Against that order he filed an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. That appeal failed. He thereupon filed a revision petition to the Mysore Board of Revenue. That petition was filed in the year 1956. On 12th February, 1957, the said petition was dismissed. Thereafter he filed a review petition before the said Board of Revenue. The said petition for review was dismissed on 23rd August, 1957, for default. The petitioner thereupon filed a petition for restoration of his review petition. This restoration application was filed on 14th Septembe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP136; (1959)ILLJ512MP
M. Hidayatullah, C.J. 1. The petitioner Jagannath Prasad Saxena was serving as an assistant geologist in the Vindhya Pradesh State till 18th June 1956 when he received an order of the Lieutenant Governor, Vindhya Pradesh, terminating his services on payment of his salary for the period of notice admissible to him under the rules. It is this order which he questions in this petition. To understand, however, his case it is necessary to set out the facts at some length. 2. Rewa State granted him a stipend to study a course of geology at Lucknow University. Under the agreement executed by him, he was to serve the state after completing his University education for a period of five years. On 19th August 1949, having obtained the degree of M.Sc. (Geology) from the University, he was appointed as assistant geologist to that State. Annexure 1 to the petition is the order appointing him. Jagannath Prasad Saxena was to get a time scale of Rs. 300--15--450 with effect from the date he joined his ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR890; (1959)IILLJ286Bom
Mudholkar, J. 1. This order will also govern Special Civil Application No. 214 of 1958. In these petitions the petitioners challenge the notification issued by the Government of Bombay in Labour and Social Welfare Department, dated 11 June, 1958, under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. That notification runs thus : 'No. MWA. 1557-J. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of S. 5 read with Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of that section of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (XI of 1948), and after consulting the Advisory Board and in supesession of the former Government of Madhya Pradesh Labour Department notification No. 564-451-XXIII, dated 23 February, 1956, the Government of Bombay hereby revise the minimum rates of wages in respect of the employment in any tobacco (including bidi-making) manufactory in the Vidharbha region of the State of Bombay as mentioned in the schedule hereto annexed and directed that this notification shall come into force with effect from 1 July 1958. Sch...
Tag this Judgment!