Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC328; (1958)60BOMLR56; (1958)ILLJ778SC
Venkatarama Aiyar, J. 1. The appellant is a limited Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1879. It is carrying on business in the manufacture of textiles, and owns three factories called Spring Mills, Textile Mills and Bombay Dye Works, all of which are situate in Bombay. In its balance sheet for the year 1951, it has shown as one of its liabilities a sum of Rs. 1,65,731-1-0 under the heading 'unclaimed wages'. This amount is made up of wages earned by the workmen in the factories but remaining undrawn by them, and represents accumulations from year to year ever since the formation of the Company which, it is stated, was about the year 1880. The dispute in this appeal mainly relates to this amount. 2. In 1953, the Legislature of the State of Bombay enacted the Bombay Labour Welfare Fund Act (Bom. XL of 1953) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and it came into force on June 4, 1953. We may, at this stage, refer to the relevant provisions of the Act, as it is their vali...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC296
ORDER D. DIS. NO. 5208/50/RDDATED 14-7-1950.Sanction is accorded for extra quota of foreign liquor being allowed to wholesale licensees in Cochin on payment by them of a commission at 20% of the price of liquor. The commission so realised from the wholesale licensees in the Cochin area will be credited to Government.By order of His Highness the Raj Pramukh,(Sd.) Assistant Secretary.To The Secretary Board of Revenue, The Accountant General.'132(1)6. Learned counsel appearing in support of this appeal, before us contends that the order dated July 14, 1950, endorsed on the foot of Exb. (1) was a statutory order passed by the State under Section 17 of the Cochin Abkari Act 1 of 1077 M.E. That section provides, inter alia, that a duty of such amount, as the Diwan may prescribe, shall, if he so directs, be levied on all liquors and intoxicating drugs sold in any part of the Cochin State. In the counter affidavit it was contended that the Secretary, Wine Merchants Association having applied f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC341; [1958]1SCR1102
Kapur, J. 1. This is an appeal by Special Leave against a judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur dated February 14, 1950 and the question for decision turns upon the construction of s. 66(1)(o) of the C.P. & Berar Municipalities Act (Act II of 1922) which in this judgment will be termed the Act. 2. A short recital of the facts of the case will suffice for its decision. The appellant is a company which has its spinning and weaving mills at Yeotmal. The appellant's bales of cotton are transported from Yeotmal to Nagpur by road and vehicles carrying them pass through the limits of Wardha Municipality. The goods being in transit, the vehicles carrying them do no more than use the road which traverses the municipal limits of Wardha and is a P.W.D. road. The goods are neither unloaded nor reloaded at Wardha but are merely carried across through the municipal area. The Municipal Committee purporting to act under s. 66(1)(o) of the Act and r. 1 of the rules made thereunde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC300; (1959)ILLJ167SC; (1958)IMLJ169(SC); [1958]1SCR1080; [1963]Supp1SCR229
Das, C.J.1. This appeal by special leave granted by this Court to the plaintiff-appellant is directed against the judgment and decree passed on November 1, 1955, by a single Judge of the Punjab High Court sitting in the Circuit Bench at Delhi in regular second appeal No. 28-D of 1955. 2. The facts leading up to the present appeal are shortly as follows : On April 6, 1943, the appellant was appointed a sub-inspector under the Delhi Audit Fund. In February 1947, he was transferred to the Co-operative Societies Department and posted as sub-inspector in the Milk Scheme. On July 3, 1947, the appellant was confirmed by the then Deputy Commissioner of Delhi who was also the ex-officio Registrar of Co-operative Societies. On August 1, 1948, the appellant was transferred to the Rehabilitation Department of the Co-operative Societies and posted as sub-inspector. On July 1, 1949, the appellant was suspended by the then Deputy Commissioner, Delhi. On July 9, 1949, the appellant was served with a c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC239; 24(1958)CLT357(SC)
Bhagwati, J. 1. This appeal with a certificate under Arts. 132 and 133(1)(c) of the Constitution arises out of a writ petition filed by the respondent in the High Court of Orissa under Art. 226 seeking to quash the proceedings taken by certain tenants of his private lands under the provisions of the Orissa Tenants' Protection Act, 1948 (Orissa III of 1948), hereinafter referred to as the 1948 Act. 2. The respondent was the ruler of the erstwhile Khandapara State which merged with the Province of Orissa under the States' Merger (Governor's Provinces) Order, 1949 with effect from August 1, 1949. The respondent had on December 14, 1947 entered into an agreement with the Governor-General of India art. 3 whereof provided that : 'The Raja shall be entitled to full ownership, use, and enjoyment of all private properties (as distinct from State Properties) belonging to him on the date of the agreement.' 3. That article further provided that if any dispute arose as to whether any item of proper...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC309; 1958CriLJ569
Vivian Bose, J.1. This is an application under Section 527 of the Criminal Procedure Code for the transfer of a criminal case from Jashpurnagar in the State of Madhya Pradesh to some other State, preferably New Delhi or Orissa, and for a request that the case be tried by a 'Superior Court' such as a District Magistrate or a Sessions Judge.2. The case is a prosecution for defamation under Sections 501 and 502 of the Indian PenalCode read with Section 34.3. The complainant is a member of the royal family of Jashpur. He resides at Jashpurnagar. 4. There are now seven accused, all of whom are Roman Catholics except one who is a Jacobite Christian. Originally, there were nine but one died and one other does not appear to have joined in the application, so that leaves seven who have. 5. The accused are scattered over India and reside at Nagpur (Bombay State), Patna (Bihar), Allahabad (Uttar Pradesh) and Raigarh (Madhya Pradesh). Two of them are priests and one a bishop. The rest are laymen. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC232; (1958)IMLJ162(SC); [1958]1SCR1052
Venkatarama Aiyar, J.1. These appeals are directed against the orders of the High Court of Nagpur dismissing the writ petitions filed by the appellants herein, and as they arise out of the same facts and raise the same points for determination, they were heard together, and will be disposed of the a common judgment. 2. The facts in Civil Appeal No. 46 to 1956 - the facts in the connected appeals are similar and do not require to be stated - are that the appellant was employed in 1939 in the Bengal Nagpur Railway as a clerk in the workshop at Nagpur. In 1946 when the State took over the administration of the Railway, it gave option to the employees to continue in service on the terms set out in a document dated July 5, 1946. The appellant accepted those terms and continued in service on the conditions mentioned in that document. Acting in exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 241(2), 247 and 266(3) of the Government of India Act, 1935, the Governor-General promulgated certain rul...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC325
S.K. Das, J.1. This appeal by the State of Mysore on a certificate granted by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad under Article 132 of the Constitution can be disposed of on two very short grounds, and it is necessary to state such facts only as have reference to those two grounds.2. The respondent, H. L. Chablani, was first appointed as Deputy Jailor at Jalna in the State of Hyderabad, as it was then called, on December 14, 1948. On April 7, 1950, he was appointed to officiate. as Assistant Superintendent of Jails in the said State. In February, 1951, the Hyderabad Public Service Commission invited applications for four posts of Assistant Superintendents, Central Jails in the Hyderabad Division. The advertisement by which applications were invited for the aforesaid posts stated inter alia that the candidates must not be less than 21 years or more than 25 years of age on February 24, 1951; it also stated that a concession in age would be allowed to temporary Government servants, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC107; 1958CriLJ254; (1958)IILLJ1SC; (1958)IIMLJ45(SC); (1958)36MysLJ(SC)189
Imam, J.1. A question of law, common to these appeals by special leave, requires determination; hence they were heard together. Special leave in Criminal Appeal No. 130 of 1956 was limited to the question whether the trial court had jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence for want of sanction under s. 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (Act II of 1947), hereinafter referred to as the Act. Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 1956 was not so limited and additional points were raised for our consideration, to which reference will be made when that appeal is specifically dealt with.2. The question of law, common in both these appeals, is whether there was any necessity for a sanction under s. 6 of the Act before a court could take cognizance of an offence under s. 161 of the Indian Penal Code or s. 5(2) of the Act or both, alleged to have been committed by a person who at the time the court was asked to take cognizance was not a public servant but was so at the time of the commission...
Tag this Judgment!