Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1952Mad659; (1952)ILLJ772Mad; (1952)2MLJ805
Subba Rao, J.1. This is an application for issuing a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India at Bombay. The petitioners who are 46 in number were workmen employed by the Madras Electric Tramways Ltd. On the 17th of February 1950 some of the workers met the Agent of the Company and discussed with him their disputes relating to bonus for the year 1949, reinstatement of 13 discharged men and the cancellation of fine on the motormen. After some discussion they dispersed. On the afternoon of 20th February, a large number of workers gathered near the entrance and passages leading to the Agent's room. The management contended that the adjourned meeting was fixed to take place on the 18th whereas the labourers stated that it was adjourned to 20th. On the 20th, the Agent refused to receive their representatives unless the five representatives who met him on the 18th came again.The labourers insisted upon two of their leaders, Ranganathan and Subramaniam t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1967)69BOMLR326; 1967MhLJ694
Tarkunde, J.1. [His Lordship after stating the facts, proceeded.] A preliminary objection to the maintainability of this petition was taken be-for me by Mr. Chagla on behalf of respondents Nos. 6 to 8. Respondent No. 8 is the Fourth Baronet; respondent No. 6 is his minor son; and respondent No. 7 is his mother, being the second wife of the Third Baronet. Mr. Chagla urged that this petition is not maintainable because the Repealing Act, under which the petition is filed, is itself ultra vires the Bombay State Legislature. The Act is ultra vires, according to Mr. Chagla, because it violates Articles 14 and 31 of the Constitution and also because it was beyond the legislative competence of the Bombay State Legislature to pass such an Act. Mr. Chagla expressly told me that respondents Nos. 6 to 8 do not challenge the Act on the ground that it violates Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution, the reason being that respondents Nos. 6 to 8 are not citizens of India. I may add that, if respondent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1962Bom12; (1961)63BOMLR379; ILR1961Bom381
Gokhale, J.(1) This appeal raises the question whether the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, applies to a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and having its objects not confined to the State of Bombay, now, so far as this case is concerned, the State of Maharashtra. The appeal has been referred to me as there has been a difference of opinion between Mr. Justice Mudholkar, as he then was, and Mr. Justice Patel.(2) The appellant is the Servants of India Society founded by the late Mr. G. K. Gokhale on 12th June 1905. It is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act (XXI of 1860), and shall hereafter be referred to as the Society. When the Bombay Public Trusts Act (XXIX of 1950), which shall hereafter be referred to as the Act, came into force, the society applied under section 18(1) of that Act registration and, in an enquiry in connection with that application held by the Assistant Charity Commissioner under section 19, contended that the provisio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1967)8GLR359
N.M. Miabhoy, C.J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging two notifications under the Land Acquisition Act (hereafter called the Act), to be presently mentioned. Petitioners are owners of two fields bearing survey numbers 1025/1 and 1025/2 situated at Balasinor, District Kaira. First respondent is the State of Gujarat. It published, on 15th February 1962, a notification dated 1st February 1962 under Section 4 of the Act, stating that the above lands were likely to be needed for a public purpose, namely, 'for establishing a market yard for the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Balasinor. ' After the objections under Section 5A of the Act were decided, first respondent published, on 4th October 1962, a notification dated 20th September 1962 under Section 6 of the Act, declaring that the above two fields were needed 'for establishing market yard for the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Balasinor. ' Petitioners thereafter filed the prese...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC92; (1954)IMLJ314(SC); [1954]1SCR587
Patanjali Sastri, C.J.1. This appeal raises issues of great public and private importance regarding the extent of protection which the Constitution of India accords to ownership of private property. 2. The first respondent herein (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) purchased the entire Touzi No. 341 of the 24-Parganas Collectorate at a revenue sale held on January 9, 1942. As such purchaser, the respondent acquired under section 37 of the Bengal Revenue Sales Act, 1859 (Central Act No. 11 of 1859) the right 'to avoid and annul all under-tenants and forthwith to eject all under-tenants' with certain exceptions which are not material here. In exercise of that right the respondent gave notices of ejectment and brought a suit in 1946 to evict certain under-tenants, including the second respondent herein, and to recover possession of lands. The suit was decreed against the second respondent who preferred an appeal to the District Judge, 24-Parganas, contending that his under-tenure ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC2557; (1976)4SCC270; [1977]1SCR255
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. This appeal by special leave, directed against a judgment dated December 13, 1974, of the High Court of Madras, arises out of these facts :2. Respondent Rabia Bai, is a citizen of India. She has her residence at Grange Yercund. Salem District. She came to Miow in 1949 that premises No. 20, Godown Street, G. T. Madras (known as Gani Market) was for sale. Consequently, by a sale-deed, dated April 29, 1949, she purchased this property from one Abdul Gani Jan Mohd. who had left for Pakistan in 1947, soon after the partition of the Indian sub-continent. Abdul Gani came to Madras in April 1949 and executed the sale-deed in her favour for a consideration of Rs. 2,40,000/- out of which Rs. 1,50,000/- was paid immediately in the form of bank drafts. Thereafter, the sale-deed was duly engrossed and sent to Karachi for execution by the vendor, who duly executed it and sent it back. It was presented at the Collector's Office, Madras and was duly stamped on June 27, 1949. After ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1957Bom83; (1956)58BOMLR741; ILR1956Bom831
Vyas, J.1. This appeal arises from an order passed by the learned District Judge of Poona dismissing Miscellaneous Application No. 325 of 1954 filed under Section 72 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act by the trustees of the Kesari Maratha Trust, and it raises an interesting question under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, namely, whether the Kesari Maratha Trust is a pub-lic trust under the Act 2. The circumstances under which the trusteesof the Kesari Maratha Trust filed the above appli-cation under Section 72 of the Bombay Public Trusts Actare these: The two newspapers 'Kesari'' and'Maratha' were started by Lokmanya Tilak inPoona. Lokmanya Tilak died in the year 1920. Be-fore his death he made a will on 5-4-1918, atColombo making certain dispositions of his property.The only provisions of the will with which weare concerned in this appeal are those which occurunder the caption 'Chhapkhana' (printing press).The testator stated in this part of his will that apublic trust had been created by h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1956Bom368; (1955)57BOMLR1088
ORDERBavdekar, J.1. The petitioner -- the Municipality of Anand -- being desirous of levying an octroi upon goods imported for consumption within the municipal limits of the town of Anand obtained approval of the Government to the imposition of Octroi and imposed octroi with effect from 1-1-1955.One of the articles upon which it was imposed was milk and the octroi imposed was 4 annas per maund. Some of the milk is milk brought within the municipal limits by societies which supply it to respondent 2 Union, who processes it and subsequently supplies it to the Government of Bombay for being sold in Bombay.Sometime after the imposition it appears that the Milk Commissioner, Bombay as well as respondent 2 Union raised a contention before the Municipality with regard to the milk being property of Government inasmuch as respondent 2 Union was collecting it merely as its agent.The Director of Local Authorities, Northern Division, Ahmedabad, also raised a Question as towhether the Municipality ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1976Bom304
Vaidya, J.1. It is rather unfortunate that the above First Appeal arising from Civil Suit NO. 39 of 1953, cannot be disposed of, in the facts and circumstances of the case, so as to put an end to the litigation which was actually started in 1946 relating to the management of the Public Trust Known as 'Haji Malang Bawa Dargah' situated on a hill Talua Kalyan of Thane District.2. This litigation started between the respondent Gopal Krishnaji Ketar on the one side and Mohammed Jaffar Mohomed Hussein and another on the other said in the course of which Ketkar claimed the sole right to manage the Dargah. It is the Dargah of a 13th Century legendary and renowned Arab Pir or saint. It is worshipped along with another tomb of a HIndu princess whom the said Pir is said to have treated as his daughter.3. The litigation ended its first course with the judgment of the Supreme Court in Gopal Krishnaji Ketar v. Mahomed Jaffer : AIR1954SC5 .4. The Supreme Court laid down in paragraph (31) of its judg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2009(6)BomCR52
V.C. Daga, J.1. The first and second petitioners 'M/s. Popcorn Entertainment in W.P. No. 9467/2008 ('M/s. Popcorn' for short) and M/s. Platinum Entertainment in W.P. No. 9468/2008 ('M/s. Platinum' for short) were allotted plot of lands by respondent No. 1 - The City and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO for short) for erecting entertainment complex in Navi Mumbai. Whereas third petitioner -M/s. Platinum Square Trust in W.P. No. 3423/2006 ('Platinum Square' for short) was allotted plot of land for establishment of country club. The said allotments were cancelled by CIDCO. The petitioners have challenged the said orders of cancellation through these petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The facts giving rise to these petitions are almost similar. The questions of law raised are identical. Rival submissions made are common to all petitions. Common written submissions are circulated by the parties. However, the petitions filed by M/s. Popcorn and M/s. P...
Tag this Judgment!