Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC242; 1957(0)KLT319(SC); [1957]1SCR179
Sinha, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the majority judgment and order of the Election Tribunal of Patiala, dated August 26, 1955, declaring the two appellants' election to be void on account of the improper rejection of the nomination paper of Buta Singh, respondent 18. 2. In order to appreciate the arguments raised on behalf of the appellants it is necessary to state the following facts : The appellants and respondents 2 to 18 filed their nomination papers on January 9, 1954, for election from a double member constituency of Samana to the Pepsu Legislative Assembly. Of the two seats, one was reserved for the Schedule Caste and the other was a general constituency. Scrutiny of the nomination papers by the Returning Officer took place on January 13, 1954. The Returning Officer accepted all the nomination papers except that of Buta Singh aforesaid on the ground that the thumb impressions of the proposer and the seconder had not been attested by an officer in accord...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC250; [1957]1SCR167
S.K. Das, J.1. The appellant is Shri Lalit Mohan Das, a pleader of about 25 years' standing, who ordinarily practiced in the Courts at Anandapur in the district of Mayurbhanj in Orissa. The Munsif of Anandapur, one Shri L. B. N. S. Deo, drew up a proceeding under Sections 13 and 14 of the Legal Practitioners Act, 1879, against the pleader for grossly improper conduct in the discharge of his professional duty and submitted a report to the High Court through the District Judge of Mayurbhanj on December 12, 1953. The District Judge forwarded the report, accompanied by his opinion, to the High Court of Orissa on March 9, 1954. The recommendation of the Munsif was that the pleader should be suspended from practice for one year. The reference was heard by the High Court of Orissa, and by its order dated March 15, 1955, the High Court came to the conclusion that the pleader was guilty of grave professional misconduct and suspended him from practice for a period of five years with effect form ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC246; [1957]1SCR414
Venkatarama Ayyar, J.1. The appellant was recruited to the Madras Provincial Judicial Service as District Munsif in 1935. In 1949 he was promoted to the office of Subordinate Judge, and on June 19, 1950, he was posted as Subordinate Judge of Masulipatnam, Krishna District. Among the suits which he tried were O. S. No. 95 of 1946 and O.S. No. 24 of 1949, which were connected, and on July 27, 1950, arguments were heard therein, and judgment reserved. On August 22, 1950, while judgment was still pending, Lingam Sitarama Rao, who was the fifth defendant in both the suits, filed an application in the High Court of Madras for transferring them to some other court on the ground that the appellant was attempting through his brother to obtain bribe from the parties, and on this application, the High Court passed an order on the same date, staying the delivery of judgment. The suits themselves were eventually transferred to the court of the Subordinate Judge of Gudivada, and the appellant was al...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC168; (1957)ILLJ253SC; [1957]1SCR143
S.K. Das, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment and order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India at Allahabad dated October 30, 1952. The relevant facts are these. The Banaras Ice Factory Limited, the appellant before us, was incorporated on September 13, 1949, as a private limited company and was carrying on the business of manufacturing ice in the city of Banaras, though its registered office was in Calcutta. The factory worked as a seasonal factory and had in its employment about 25 workmen at all material times. Those workmen were employed from the month of March to the month of September every year. The appellant company got into financial difficulties on account of trade depression, rise in the price of materials and increase in the wages and emoluments of workmen. It tried to secure a loan of Rs. 10,000/- from a Bank but met with no success. Thereupon, it decided to close down the factory and on January 15, 1952, a notice was given to its workmen saying t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC297; 1957CriLJ409; [1957]1SCR399
Venkatarama Ayyar, J.1. The point for decision in these appeals is whether Sections 4(2), 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of the Madras Prohibition Act No. X of 1937, hereinafter referred to as the Act, are unconstitutional and void. 2. It will be convenient first to set out the impugned statutory provisions. Section 4, omitting what is not material, runs as follows : 4(1) 'Whoever (a) imports, exports, transports or possesses liquor or any intoxicating drug; or ..................................................................... (g) uses, keeps or has in his possession any materials, still, utensil, implement or apparatus whatsoever for the tapping of today or the manufacture of liquor or any intoxicating drug; or ....................................................................... (j) consumes or buys liquor or any intoxicating drug; or (k) allows any of the acts aforesaid upon premises in his immediate possession, shall be punished - ....................................................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC121; (1957)59BOMLR384; [1957]1SCR121
S.K. Das, J. 1. These two appeals, brought on certificates granted by the High Court of Bombay, raise common questions of law and for that reason, have been heard together. This judgment will govern them both. CIVIL APPEAL No. 105 OF 1956. 2. In Civil Appeal No. 105 of 1956 the main appellant is the Barsi Light Railway Company Limited, Kurduwadi, within the State of Bombay (hereinafter called the Railway Company). The principal respondent is the President of the Barsi Light Railwaymen's Union, respondent No. 1 to the appeal. The General Manager, Central Railway, Bombay, and the Secretary, Railway Board, New Delhi, are respondents Nos. 4 and 5. The facts, so far as they are relevant for our purpose, are these. Under an agreement dated August 1, 1895, between the Secretary of State for India in Council and the Railway Company, the latter constructed, maintained and worked a light railway between Barsi Town and Barsi Road Station on the railway system, known then as the Great Indian Penin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC381; 1957CriLJ559
Jagannadhadas, J.1. These are two appeals by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad confirming that of the Sessions Judge of Allahabad. Both the appellants were convicted and sentenced for having committed various offences inclusive of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of death there for against each. At the trial there were five other co-accused charged in respect of the same offences but they were all acquitted. The victim of the offences was a boy named Om Prakash aged about 14 year He is the son of one Chauhan, a civil gazetted officer in Ordnance Depot, Chheoki, Allahabad, drawing a pay of about Rs. 600 per month and believed to be rich. The case against both the appellants is that they, along with the five others who have been acquitted, conspired to extort a sum of Rs. 10,000 from Chauhan by kidnapping and murdering his son, Om Prakash. The appellant, Ram Chandra, is a person about 25 years in age, who has received edu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC264; (1957)ILLJ477SC; [1957]1SCR152
Bhagwati, J. 1. This appeal with a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Saurashtra raises an interesting question whether the agaries working in the Salt Works at Kuda in the Rann of Cutch are workmen within the meaning of the term as defined in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as the Act. 2. The facts as found by the Industrial Tribunal are not in dispute and are as follows. The appellants are lessees of the Salt Works from the erstwhile State of Dharangadhra and also hold a licence for the manufacture of salt on the land. The appellants require salt from the manufacture of certain chemicals and part of the salt manufactured at the Salt Works is utilised by the appellants in the manufacturing process in the Chemical Works at Dharangadhara and the remaining salt is sold to outsiders. The appellants employ a Salt Superintendent who is in charge of the Salt Works and generally supervises the Works and the manufacture of salt carried on there. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC180; 1958CriLJ300; [1957]1SCR187
Imam, J.1. The appellant was sentenced to death for the murder of Daya Ram by shooting him with a country made pistol. He was also convicted for being in possession of an unlicensed fire-arm under the Arms Act for which offence he was sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment. He appealed to the High Court of Allahabad, but his appeal was dismissed and the conviction and sentence was affirmed. Against the decision of the Allahabad High Court the appellant obtained special leave to appeal to this Court. 2. According to the prosecution, the occurrence took place at about midnight of July 4, 1954, when Daya Ram was sleeping on a cot on a platform. Near him were sleeping Gokul, Doongar and Jai Singh, while two women Ratto and Bhuri slept in a room to the north of the platform and adjoining it. The report of the shot fired woke up these people. According to them, they saw the appellant running towards the east. He was accompanied by three others who were armed with lathis. Daya Ram died ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1957SC255; [1957]1SCR77
Jagannadhadas, J.1. This is a appeal by special leave against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Calcutta and arises out of an application filed by the appellant under s. 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the course of execution proceedings in the Second Court of the Subordinate Judge at Alipore, District 24-Parganas. The facts leading thereto are as follows. 2. One Ramani Kanta Roy was possessed of considerable properties. He had three sons, Rajes Kanta Roy, Rabindra Kanta Roy and Ramendra Kanta Roy. Rabindra died childless in the year 1938 leaving a widow, Santi Debi. In 1934 Ramani created an endowment in respect of some of his properties in favour of his family deity and appointed his three sons as shebaits. After the death of Rabindra his widow Santi Debi, instituted a suit against the other members of the family in 1941 for a declaration that she, as the heir of her deceased husband, was entitled to function as a shebait in the place of her husband. The suit terminat...
Tag this Judgment!