Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC434; (1958)IIMLJ117(SC); [1958]1SCR1402
Kapur, J.1. In these two appeals brought by leave of the Patna High Court against a judgment and two decrees of that court a common and the sole question for decision is one of adverse possession. Two cross suits were brought in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Dhanbad, raising common questions of fact and law. The appellant and respondent Manilal Becharlal Sangvi were defendants in one (Suit No. 16 of 1945) and plaintiffs in the other (Suit No. 50 of 1945). Respondents Nos. 1 - 3 were the plaintiffs in the former suit and defendants in the latter. The other respondents were defendants in the latter suit and were added as plaintiffs at the appellate stage under O. 1, r. 10, Code of Civil Procedure in the appeal taken against the decision in the former suit. Both the suits were decreed against the appellant and respondent Manilal Becharlal Sangvi who took two appeals to the High Court at Patna. Both these appeals were dismissed by one judgment dated September 27, 1951, but two decree...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC444; (1958)60BOMLR929; 1958CriLJ814; (1958)36MysLJ(SC)343; [1958]1SCR1394
Sinha, J.1. The only question for determination in this appeal, is whether an offence punishable under s. 24(1)(4) of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act LVII of 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), has been brought home to the appellant. 2. The facts of this case are short and simple. The appellant is the owner, by purchase in 1945, of certain premises situate in Vile Parle, Bombay. Under the predecessor-in-title of the appellant, was a tenant, named Thirumal Rao Potdar, in respect of a room in those premises, at a monthly rent of Rs. 20 including water rate of Rs. 2. After the appellant's purchase, the tenant aforesaid continued to hold the tenancy on those very terms. The said premises used to enjoy the amenity of water supply from a municipal tap. As the appellant's predecessor-in-title had made default in payment of municipal taxes, the water supply had been cut off by the Municipality early in May, 1947. Since after that, the tenants including the sai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC448; (1958)60BOMLR632; (1958)IIMLJ108(SC); (1958)36MysLJ(SC)513; [1958]1SCR1384
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal by special leave arises from the notice of motion taken out by the respondent official assignee under s. 55 of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act against the appellants for a declaration that a deed of gift executed by the insolvent Daulatram Hukamchand on May 22, 1950, in favour of the appellants was void. It appears that some creditors of Daulatram filed a petition in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Insolvency Case No. 74 of 1951, for an order that the said Daulatram be adjudged insolvent as he had given notice of suspension of payment of the debts on August 2, 1951. Daulatram was adjudicated insolvent on August 21, 1951, with the result that the estate of the insolvent vested in the respondent under s. 17 of the Act. On September 26, 1951, the respondent took out the present notice of motion. The impugned deed of gift has been executed by the insolvent in favour of his wife and three sons who are the appellants before us. In reply to the not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC452b; [1958]1SCR1355; [1958]9STC267(SC)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos. 412 and 413 of 1956. Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated October 17, 1955, of the Patna High Court in M.J.C. No. 577 of 1953, made on reference by the Board of Revenue, Bihar in Appeals Nos. 495 and 496 of 1952. M. C. Setalvad, Attorney-General, for India, Rajeshwari Prasad and S. P. Varma, for the appellant. Mahabir Prasad, Advocate-General for the State of Bihar and R. C. Prasad, for the respondent. 1958. February 19. The Judgment of Das, C.J. Venkatarama Aiyar, S. K. Das and Sarkar, JJ. ",as delivered by Das C. J. Bose, J. delivered a separate judgment. DAS C. J.-These two appeals, which have been filed with the special leave granted by an order made by this Court on April 3, 1956, and which have been consolidated together by the same order, are dire-led against the judgment pronounced by the Patna high Court on October 17, 1955, in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 577 of 1953, deciding certain questions refer. r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC764; [1958]9STC289(SC)
S.K Das, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave. The Collector of Commercial Taxes, Orissa is the appellant, andMessr Section Bharat Sabai Grass Ltd., are the respondentSection The respondents entered appearance and filed a statement of their case ; but later they withdrew appearance and at the final hearing of the appeal, we have had the assistance of the learned Solicitor-General alone, who appeared in support of the appeal.2. The facts relating to the appeal lie within a very narrow compasSection MessrSection Bharat Sabai Grass Ltd., a limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, had their head office in Calcutta. They carried on the business of collection of bamboo and sabai grass in Orissa and sold the same to certain mills which manufacture paper, namely, the Orient Paper Mill, which is situate in Orissa, and Titagarh Paper Mill, and Bengal Paper Mill, situate in Bengal. Sometime in June 1948, a notice under Section 12(5) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, XIV of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC419; [1958]1SCR1295
ORDER.In this Directorate Order No. 2(1)-A/50, dated the 23rd May, 1952, Shri K.S. Srinivasan, then officiating Public Relations Officer, All India Radio, was appointed to that post in a quasi-permanent capacity with effect from the 1st May, 1949. Subsequently, in August 1952, all posts of Public Relations Officers, except the one in the External Services Division, were held in abeyance. As the post of Public Relations Officer belongs to the same grade as Assistant Station Director carrying identical scales of pay Shri Srinivasan was appointed Assistant Station Director in the External Services Division with effect from the 22nd September, 1952. Under the provision contained in the Ministry of Home Affairs Office Memorandum No. 54/136/51-NGS, dated the 24th April, 1952, Shri Srinivasan will carry with him the quasi-permanent status of his former post of Public Relations Officer while holding the post of Assistant Station Director. (Sd.) M. Lal,Director-General.'3. A copy of the order w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC388; 1958CriLJ803; (1958)IILLJ252SC; (1958)36MysLJ(SC)347; [1958]1SCR1340
Subba Rao J.1. This appeal by Special Leave is directed against the Order of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur and raises the question of construction of some of the provisions of the Factories Act (LXIII of 1948) hereinafter referred to as the Act). Before posing the questions raised it would be convenient and useful at the outset to state the facts either found by the High Court or admitted by the parties. 2. Messrs. Brijlal Manilal and Company is a bidi factory situated in Sagar. The 1st appellant, Chintamanrao, is the Managing-Partner of the firm while the appellant 2nd, Kantilal, is its active Manager. The Company manufactures bidis. The process of manufacture, so far as is relevant to the question raised, is carried out in two stages. 3. The first stage : The management enters into a contract with independent contractors, known as Sattedars, for the supply of bidis locally. The documents embodying the terms of the contract entered into by the Sattedars were not produced in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC437; (1958)IIMLJ103(SC); [1958]1SCR1331
Bhagwati, J.1. This appeal with a certificate under s. 109(a) read with s. 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Act V of 1908) is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Nagpur High Court dismissing the appeal of the appellant and confirming the dismissal of his suit by the learned Second Additional District Judge, Akola. 2. The appellant, who was the plaintiff in the trial court filed in the Court of the First Additional District Judge, Akola, Civil Suit No. 2-B/7-B of 1944 against the respondent, a limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act of 1882, which owned a Ginning and Pressing Factory and carried on business of ginning and pressing cotton at Akot in District Akola. 3. The appellant alleged that he was one of the creditors of the company which used to borrow money from him for about 35 years past. He claimed to have acted as Banker of the company and the sums borrowed from him were entered in the account books of the company in two khatas, one kno...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC394; (1958)IIMLJ99(SC); (1958)36MysLJ(SC)385; [1958]1SCR1287
Venkatarama Aiyer, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the High Court of Calcutta dated August 6, 1956, rejecting the application of the appellant to be brought on record as appellant No. 152 of 1955 pending before it. 2. The second respondent, Sudhir Kumar Mitter, was the owner of two houses, No. 86/1, Cornwallis Street and No. 7-C, Kirti Mitter Lane, Calcutta. On May 19, 1934, he executed a mortgage for Rs. 3,000 over the said houses in favour of the first respondent, Sm. Nirmala Sundari Dassi. She instituted Suit No. 158 of 1935 on this mortgage, and obtained a preliminary decree on March 8, 1935. The matter then came before the Registrar for taking of accounts, and by his report dated July 23, 1935 he found that a sum of Rs. 3,914-6-6 was due to her, and on that, a final decree was passed on April 20, 1936. Under r. 27 of ch. 16 of the Original Side Rules of the Calcutta High Court, a person in whose favour a decree is passed has to apply for drawing up of the decree within ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1958SC414; 1958(6)BLJR479; 1958CriLJ809
Das, C.J. 1. The respondents before us were put up for trial for offences under Sections 147, 302, 325 and 326, Indian Penal Code read with s. 149 of the same Code. On July 24, 1953, the temporary Civil Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur, acquitted them. The State of Uttar Pradesh apparently felt aggrieved by this acquittal and intended to appeal to the High Court under s. 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Under art. 157 of the Indian Limitation Act an appeal under the Code of Criminal Procedure from an order of acquittal is required to be filed within six months from the date of the order appealed from. The period of limitation for appealing from the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge on July 24, 1953, therefore, expired on January 24, 1954. That day being a Sunday the Deputy Government Advocate on January 25, 1954, filed a petition of appeal on behalf of that State. A plain copy of the judgment sought to be appealed from was filed with that petition. The High Court office im...
Tag this Judgment!