Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC375; 20(1954)CLT1(SC); [1954]1SCR1
Mukherjea, J.1. The six appeals arise out of as many applications, presented to the High Court of Orissa, under article 226 of the Constitution, by the properties of certain permanently settled estates within the State of Orissa, challenging the constitutional validity of the legislation known as the Orissa Estates Abolition Act of 1952 (hereinafter called 'the Act') and praying for mandatory writs against the State Government restraining them from enforcing the provisions of the Acts so far as the estates owned by the petitioners are concerned. 2. The impugned Act was introduced in the Orissa State Legislature on the 17th of January, 1950 and was passed by it on the 28th September, 1951. It was reserved by the State Governor for consideration of the President and the President gave his assent on 23rd January, 1952. The Act thus receives the protection of articles 31(4) and 31A of the Constitution though it was not and could not be included in the list of statutes enumerated in the nin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC23
Bhagwati, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the decision of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur confirming the conviction and sentence passed upon the appellant by the Court of the Magistrate First Class, Akola.2. The appellant was charged:(i) Under Section 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act 24 of 1946, read with Clause 2(1)(a), Central Provinces and Berar Food-grains Export Restriction Order 1943 for exporting 1405 bags of un-cleaned tur dal on 26-12-1946 from Yeotmal to Kalyan without permit in that he had no permit to export uncleaned tur dal and was not the holder of permit No. 10315 which moreover was exhausted before that day; (ii) Under Section 420, Penal Code for cheating the Railway authorities and thus obtaining seven wagons to load 1405 bags to Kalyan; and (iii) Under Section 471/465, Penal Code for fraudulently using as genuine permit No. 10315 knowing or having reason to believe at the time of using it to be a forged document in certain matters. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC194; (1956)IILLJ454SC
Imam, J. 1. These appeals by special leave are directed against the decision of the Labour Appellate 'Tribunal, Calcutta, which reversed the decision of the Third Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta. The appellant had filed applications under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking permission of the Tribunal to dismiss the respondents in both the appeals, which permission was granted. Against the orders of the Industrial Tribunal the respondents filed appeals before the Labour Appellate Tribunal.2. The orders of the Industrial Tribunal disclose that the respon-dents had been warned on several occasions for their bad work and misbehavior and with respect to some of, them for even acts of violence. Thereafter the respondents absented themselves from work without leave on a particular date and for ten subsequent days, which in itself amounted to misconduct involving the penalty, if sought to be imposed, ofdismissal under the Standing Orders of the appellant. The respondents expl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC384; (1953)IIMLJ257(SC); [1953]4SCR1184
Patanjali Sastri, C.J.1. This is an application under article 32 of the Constitution seeking protection of the petitioners' fundamental right under article 15(1) against alleged violation thereof by the respondents. 2. The petitioners are three residents of Etah in Uttar Pradesh. They complain that at the by-elections to the Municipal Board of Etah held on November 2, 1951, December 8, 1951, and March 17, 1952, at which respondents 4, 11 and 12 were respectively elected, the petitioners were deprived of their rights to exercise their votes and to seek their election as candidates, as those by-elections were held on communal lines on the basis of separate electorates contrary to the provisions of the Constitution. They also allege that the nomination of respondent 3 as a member of the Board by the Government was an illegal exercise of its powers, as the interest which that respondent was nominated to represent in the Board was already sufficiently represented. The petitioners accordingl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC394; 1954CriLJ1480; [1953]4SCR1188
Jagannadhadas, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the Judicial Commissioner of Vindhya Pradesh dated 10th March, 1951, by leave granted under article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution. The first and the second appellants were at the material period of time respectively the Minister for Industries and the Secretary to the Government, Commerce and Industries Department of the then United State of Vindhya Pradesh. The case for the prosecution against them as follows : In the State of Panna (one of the component units of the United State of Vindhya Pradesh) there are certain diamond mines. By an agreement dated the 1st of August, 1936, between the Panna Durbar on the one part and the Panna Diamond Mining Syndicate on the other part, the latter obtained a lease for carrying out diamond-mining operations for a period of 15 years. It appears that on or about the 31st October, 1947, the Panna Durbar directed the stoppage of the mining work on the ground that the Syndicate was not carry...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC404; 1953CriLJ1621; [1954]1SCR30
Patanjali Sastri, C.J.1. These are connected appeals by special leave from the order of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta dated January 6, 1951, confirming the conviction of the appellants and the sentences imposed on them by the Special Court, Alipur, Calcutta, constituted under the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act, 1949. 2. The first appellant was at all material times the proprietor of the firm of Kedar Nath Mohanlal, Managing Agents of Shiva Jute Press Ltd., an incorporated company having a number of godowns at Cossipore in West Bengal, and the second appellant was the Area Land Hiring and Disposals Officer in the service of the Government of India. Some of the godowns belonging to the company were requisitioned by the Government for military purposes in 1943 and were released in December, 1945. The appellants, along with two others who were given the benefit of doubt and acquitted, were charged, with having conspired to cheat, and having cheated, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC5
Bose, J.1. This is an appeal by the second plaintiff who is the adopted son of the first.2. The suit is for a declaration that the second plaintiff is the guardian and 'vahivatdar' of the Darga in suit known as Haji Malang and that he alone is entitled to look after the Darga and manage it and control, direct and perform its rites and rituals; also for a declaration that the second plaintiff is entitled to take the offerings placed before the tomb of Haji Malang throughout the year, as also the cash and other offerings now lying in the Kalyan Treasury under the orders of the District Magistrate of that place. A perpetual injunction is also asked for restraining the defendant from disturbing the second plaintiff in the exercise of those rights.3. The suit has certain curious features. The plaintiffs are Brahmins while the Darga which they claim they have the right to manage is a Muslim shrine, and beside the tomb of the Muslim saint is the tomb of a Hindu princess. Offerings are made at...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC41
Mahajan, J.1. This Appeal is directed against a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta, dated 27-6-1950, affirming the judgment of S.R. Das Gupta J., dated 8-7-1949, in Suit No. 3798 of 1948.2. The principal question to be determined in the case was whether upon a proper construction of the will, dated 14-3-1927, of Raja Prafulla Nath Tagore, deceased, the Administrator-General of Bengal was entitled to possession of a house known as 'Tagore Villa' at Alambazar for a period of 15 years as provided in the said will. The High Court answered the question in the affirmative. This answer is in challenge in this appeal before us.3. Raja Prafulla Nath Tagore, a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law, died on 2-7-1938, leaving him surviving his widow and five sons. Kumar Purnendu Nath Tagore, the appellant, is his eldest son. On 14-3-1927, the late Raja executed his last will and testament. Clause 82 of the will is in these terms:'I give my Alambazar Garden House 'Ta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC385; (1954)56BOMLR30; [1954]24CompCas1(SC); (1953)IIMLJ259(SC); [1954]1SCR117
Mahajan, J.1. These appeals, though they arise out of two different suits, 336 of 1945 and 786 of 1948, can be disposed of by a common judgment, as both these suits were instituted in effect to obtain the same relief. 2. In July, 1944, a struggle commenced between the group of Sir Padampat Singhania and the group of Shri Maneklal Prem Chand for control of the management of the Bombay Life Assurance Co. Ltd. and there was a race for the acquisition of the shares of the company between the two groups. Sir Padampat, the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 54 of 1950, and respondent in the cross appeal No. 53 of 1950, on the 25th July, 1944, purchased through Shri P. N. Gupta, his Bombay agent, 667 shares of the company, 484 out of which belonged to Mr. Reddy, the appellant in C.A. No. 53 of 1950 and respondent in Civil Appeal No. 54 of 1950. This deal was made on his behalf by a firm of share and stock brokers, Bhaidas Gulabdas. The shares were sold at the rate of Rs. 300 per share. On the 29th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC370; (1953)IIMLJ252(SC); [1953]4SCR894
Mukherjea, J. 1. The appellant before us is the sixth defendant in a suit, commenced by the plaintiff-respondent in the court of the Subordinate Judge at Masulipatam (being Original Suit No. 29 of 1937) for recovery of a sum of Rs. 99,653 annas odd by enforcement of a simple mortgage bond. The mortgage bond is dated 28th September, 1930, and it was executed by defendant No. 1 for himself and as guardian of his two minor sons - defendants 2 and 3 - all of whom constituted together a Joint Hindu family at that time. The plaintiff mortgagee happens to be the son-in-law of defendant No. 1 and at the time of the execution of the mortgage the first defendant was indebted to a large number of persons including the mortgagee himself, and being hard pressed by his creditors requested the plaintiff to lend him a sum of Rs. 1,25,000 on the hypothecation of the properties in suit, to enable him to tide over his difficulties and discharge his debts. The total consideration of Rs. 1,25,000 as stated...
Tag this Judgment!