Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC191; (1959)IILLJ245SC
B.P. Sinha, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises the question of the validity and correctness of the Award dated 31-1-1957, of the Industrial Tribunal, Assam, directing the reinstatement, with all back wages, of one Nandeswar Bora, an employee of the appellant company which had dismissed him for misconduct, after holding a regular inquiry against him.2. The appellant is a company incorporated under the English Companies Act, 1927, with its registered office in London. The appellant is the owner of Balipara Tea Estate in Assam, hereinafter referred to as 'the Estate'. Prior to 1953, McLoed and Company Limited was the Managing Agent of the appellant in respect of the Estate. Jardine Henderson Limited became the Managing Agent in 1953. Nandeswar Bora aforesaid had been in the employment of the appellant as a Women Mohurir in the Estate, and his duties included the preparation and maintenance of Leaf Weighment Book and the Daily Wages Book, also called Hazri Book, in respect of female ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC923; (1959)IILLJ388SC; [1959]Supp(2)SCR836
Wanchoo, J.1. These are two appeals by the management by special leave in an industrial matter arising out of two applications under s. 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter called the Act). The facts of the case are briefly these : The appellant, Messrs. Sasa Musa Sugar Works (Private) Ltd. is a sugar factory in District Saran (Bihar). The factory was established in 1932. In June 1942, a trade union was formed in this factory. In July 1943, trouble arose between the workmen and the management resulting in the discharge of three office-bearers of the union, including one Shams-ud-din, who was then the joint secretary. That matter was referred to adjudication and the discharged workmen were ordered to be reinstated in the beginning of 1944. In December 1944, there was trouble again and a large number of workmen were dismissed, including Shams-ud-din, who had by now become the president of the union. This dispute was again referred to an Industrial Tribunal, which again ordered ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC914; 26(1960)CLT130(SC); [1959]Supp(2)SCR814
S.K. Das, J.1. This appeal on a certificate granted by the High Court of Orissa is from the judgment and decree of the said High Court dated March 9, 1951, by which it substantially affirmed the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Sambalpur in Title Suit No. 16 of 1944 except for a modification of the decree for damages awarded by the latter. Two questions of law arise in this appeal, one relating to the interpretation of s. 32, sub-s. (5) and the other to s. 50 of the Indian Evidence Act (I of 1872), hereinafter referred to as the Evidence Act. 2. The material facts relating to the appeal are susceptible of a simple and concise statement. Three persons Nimai Charan Misra, Lakshminarayan Misra and Baikuntha Pati brought a suit for a declaration of their title to and recovery of possession of certain properties details whereof are not necessary for our purpose. This suit was numbered Title Suit 16 of 1944 in the court of the Subordinate Judge of Sambalpur. The claim of the plai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC960; 1959CriLJ1223; [1959]Supp(2)SCR798
Subba Rao, J. 1. These six appeals by special leave were filed against the judgment of the Board of Revenue dated July 28, 1954. 2. The respondent was a Zamindar of Gadhi, Baghu and Santokpore Villages in Uttar Pradesh. He claimed that the plaint-schedule lands were his Sir. The appellants set up a dispute claiming that they were admitted by the respondent as hereditary tenants and that they were in possession of the said lands. As the dispute was likely to cause breach of the peace, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Baghpat, took proceedings under s. 145, Code of Criminal Procedure, and attached the disputed lands on October 8, 1948, and directed them to be placed in possession of a superdgidar pending disposal of those proceedings. After making the necessary enquiry, by an order dated March 20, 1950, he found that the appellants were in possession of the said lands and declared that they were entitled to be in possession thereof until evicted therefrom in due course of law. 3. On June 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC1035; (1959)IILLJ366SC; [1959]Supp(2)SCR761
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal by special leave arises out of an industrial dispute between the Patna Electric Supply Co., Ltd., (hereafter called the appellant) and its workmen represented by the Patna Electric Supply Workers' Union (hereafter called the respondent). The appellant is a public company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and has its registered office at Patna. It is an industrial establishment engaged solely in public utility service, namely, the supply of electricity for the requirements of the public and is a licensee under the provisions of the Electric Supply Act, 1948 (54 of 1948). On March 29, 1952, the Government of Bihar, by a notification issued under s. 7 read with s. 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (hereafter called the Act) referred twelve items of dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal consisting of Mr. H. K. Chaudhuri as the sole member. Out of the said items the present appeal is concerned with only one; and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC855; [1959]Supp(2)SCR748
Sinha, J.1. When the hearing of the appeal had been concluded on March 18, 1959, we had informed the parties, as also the counsel for the Election Commission of India, that the appeal is dismissed with costs, and that the reasons would follow. We now proceed to give our reasons. 2. This is an appeal on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Judicature for the State of Punjab at Chandigarh, against the judgment and order dated November 25, 1958, of that Court, dismissing an appeal against the order of the Election Tribunal, Hissar, dated September 14, 1958 setting aside the appellant's election to the Punjab Legislative Assembly. The appellant was the successful candidate from the general seat which was a double-member constituency of Sirsa, the other successful candidate being a Harijan candidate - respondent No. 2 in this Court. The first respondent contested the general seat. The Election Commission of India was added as the third respondent by an order of this Court, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC831; 1959CriLJ1120; [1959]Supp(2)SCR776
Imam, J.1. The appellant was convicted under s. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under s. 161 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment on each count. The sentences were made to run concurrently. 2. On the facts found by the courts below the appellant accepted Rs. 20/- as illegal gratification from one Malekchand who had applied for allotment of a house. The appellant was employed at that time as a clerk in the office of the District Relief and Rehabilitation Officer, Meerut. The aforesaid sum of money was accepted by the appellant as bribe with a view to getting a house allotted to Malekchand. There can be no question that, on the facts found, the appellant was guilty both under s. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under s. 161 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The first point taken was that the investigation had taken place by a police officer below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. Consequently, the investigation had take...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC1041; [1959]Supp(2)SCR781
Sarkar, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises concerns the right to certain plots of land in village Sultanwind, Tehsil and District Amritsar in the Punjab. It raises a question of the Punjab customs. 2. Sahib Singh, the last male owner of the lands in dispute, died in December 1918 leaving a widow Nihal Kaur. The widow succeeded to the lands but on her remarriage soon thereafter, she was divested of them and they passed to Sahib Singh's mother, Kishen Kaur who died on November 12, 1942. 3. On Kishen Kaur's death disputes arose between Sahib Singh's sister, Jeo, the respondent in this appeal and his agnatic relation, the appellant Ujagar Singh, as to the ownership of the lands. The Tehsildar entered the respondent's name as the owner of the lands in the revenue records but on appeal by the appellant, the Collector of Amritsar directed the name of the respondent to be removed and the appellant's name to be entered in its place. 4. On June 11, 1945, the respondent filed a suit ag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC283
S. Jafer Imam, J.1. The Appellants Salekh Chand and Baboo Ram were convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act 1946, read with Section 9 of the U. P. Cement Control Order, 1953. They were sentenced to 6 months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- each, or in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. They appealed against their conviction and sentence but the Sessions Judge of Meerut dismissed the appeal, and the application in revision to the Allahabad High Court was also dismissed summarily.2. There can be no question on the facts proved that in the month of June, 1954, the appellants sold 129 bags of cement at Rs. 9/14/- per bag to one Khazan. The only question which fell to be decided was whether the sale of these 129 bags of cement at Rs. 9/14/- per bag was beyond the controlled price of cement, and if so sold, the appellants were guilty under Section 7 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946. In order to a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1959SC847; 1959CriLJ1127; (1960)ILLJ239SC; [1959]Supp(2)SCR739
Wanchoo, J.1. This appeal is on a certificate granted by the Judicial Commissioner of Ajmer. One Shivji Lal Joshi (hereinafter called the accused) was prosecuted under s. 161 of the Indian Penal Code and s. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, No. II of 1947. He was convicted by the Special Judge on both counts and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a total period of six months. He filed an appeal before the Judicial Commissioner of Ajmer. The appeal was allowed on the ground that the accused was not a public servant, though the Judicial Commissioner agreed with the findings of the Special Judge so far as the facts were concerned. The State applied for a certificate under Art. 134(1)(c) of the Constitution to enable it to appeal to this Court. This certificate was granted; and that is how the appeal has come before us. 2. The facts which have been found by both the courts are these. The accused was a teacher in the railway school at Phulera. Prem Singh who was the compl...
Tag this Judgment!