Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC104; 1978(2)ELT307(SC); [1963]3SCR642
Hidayatullah, J.1. This is a petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution challenging the imposition of Excise Duty on the petitioner by virtue of item No. 17 'Footwear' of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) with effect from February 28, 1954, and the calculation of the duty ad valorem by including in the price, charges for freight, packing and distribution. 2. The petitioner, the British India corporation Ltd. is a public limited company which was formed to take-over other companies and to amalgamate them. Among the companies which the petitioner took over were Cooper Allan & Company Ltd., and the North West Tannery Company Ltd., both at Kanpur. These two Companies manufacture shoes and other leather goods and operate as a single unit manufacturing the well-known brand of 'F L E X' shoes. As a result of the financial proposals of the Central Government for the financial year 1952-55, a bill (No. 9 of 1954) was introduced in parliament on February 27...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC309; 1963MhLJ49(SC); [1963]3SCR623
Das Gupta, J.1. This unfortunate litigation over a school which was started sixty yearsago is one of the unhappy consequences of a feud that raised it ugly head inDaudi Bohra Community many years ago. The School was started at Burhanpur bycertain members of the Daudi Bohra Community of Burhanpur in the year 1902. Itwas named Madrasai Faize Hakimia and its object was to impart religious andsecular education to boys of the Daudi Bohra Community. Funds were collectedfor the purpose of the school from the members of that community for themaintenance of the school. In the year 1908 English classes were added to theschool and in 1911 it was raised to the status of a High School under the name'Madrasai Hakimia and Coronation High School'. Some time before thison May 24, 1909 one Daudi Bohra of Surat of the name of Abdul Hussain AbdullaliFaizullabhai Muchhala made a waqf of certain properties in Bombay for thebenefit and advantage of this school at Burhanpur. For the management of thistrust he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC302; [1963]3SCR604
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises the old familiar question about the limits of the High Court's jurisdiction to interfere with findings of fact in a second appeal under s. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Defendants 1 & 2 who are the appellants before us contend that the High Court has exceeded its jurisdiction in interfering with the findings of fact recorded by the lower appellate Court in their favour in dismissing the suit field against them by respondent No. 1. Before dealing with this question, it is necessary to refer to the material facts leading to the present dispute between the parties. 2. It appears that there was a partnership between appellant No. 1 Ramachandra Iyer, his father-in-law v. V.V. Kuppuswami Ayyar who was the father of appellant No. 2 Vanchinatha Ayyar, Rama Ayyar and Lakshamanan Chettier. This partnership worked two mills in Kasha Chidambaram. Lakshmanan Chattier is the father of respondent No. 1, the plaintiff, and respondent No. 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC340; [1963]3SCR585
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. The two appellants Gurcharan Singh and Surjit Singh along with three others, Baland Singh, Daljit Singh and Ajit Singh, were tried before the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Ferozepore for offences under Section 148 and s. 302/149 I.P.C. The prosecution case against these five persons was that on or about the 18th May, 1961, they formed an unlawful assembly at the village Jhote with the common object of killing Arjan Singh, Sukhjit Singh Gurdial Singh and Piara Singh alias Balo, and that in prosecution of the said common object, they committed the offence of rioting when they were armed with deadly weapons. That is the essence of the charge under s. 148. It was further alleged that on the same day and at the same time and place the said members of the unlawful assembly carried out its unlawful object and in so doing, the appellant Gurcharan Singh murdered Gurdial Singh and Sukhjit Singh, while the appellant Surjit Singh murdered Arjan Singh and Piara Singh. That is how ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC528; [1962(5)FLR223]; (1963)ILLJ122SC; [1963]3SCR575
Mudholkar, J.1. In this appeal by special leave against an award made by the Third Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, two questions arise for consideration. The first is whether the dismissal of Robin Bose, Purchaser, was justified and the other is whether the appellant's employees were entitled to any wages for the period between November 13, 1958, and January 4, 1959, during which there was a lock-out. 2. In a sense the two questions are separate and we will first mention the facts relevant to the question regarding the dismissal of Robin Bose. Bose was a clerk, designated as Purchaser by the appellant company. On September 13, 1958, at about 10-00 a.m. R. N. Chatterjee, under whose supervision Bose was working, took from the latter's table the purchase estimate book maintained by him for the purpose of checking an item of purchase made by him on August 18, 1958. Shortly afterwards Bose went up to Chatterjee and asked for the book to be returned. Chatterjee told him that the book shou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC161; [1962(5)FLR292]; (1963)ILLJ677SC; [1963]3SCR571
Mudholkar, J.1. The only point for consideration in this appeal by special leave from an award of the Industrial Tribunal at Allahabad is whether the 'crushing season' of 1958-59 must be deemed to have ended on March 12, 1959 when the actual crushing of sugar cane stopped or on March 16, 1959 when all ancillary operations in the factory came to an end and the entire machinery was at a stand-still. According to the appellants the 'crushing season' came to an end on the latter date while according to the respondents who are the employees of the factory it came to an end on the former date. 2. The importance of determining the date on which the season terminated arises out of the admitted position that only those seasonal workers who are borne on the muster roll of the factory on the day next to the date on which the crushing season ended would be entitled to three days' closure holidays. It is the case of the respondents that the appellants employ about 1,600 seasonal workers and about 6...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1963]3SCR564
Sinha, C.J.1. This appeal, on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court under Art. 143(1)(c) of the Constitution is directed against the order of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, dated December 21, 1960, setting aside the order of acquittal passed by the trial Magistrate, dated July 2, 1958. We heard this appeal on the eve of the long vacation and pronounced our order to the effect that the appeal was allowed and the order of acquittal was to stand, and that reasons would be given later. 2. It appears that the appellant, who is a practising lawyer, had been employed by the respondent to work for him to investigate the title to some property which the lawyer was about to purchase, sometime in October 1952. The prosecution case was that the respondent has entrusted the sum of Rs. 5000/- to the appellant for depositing in Court in connection with an application in respect of the proposed transaction, under the Bengal Money Lenders' Act, and that the appellant having b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1253; [1962(5)FLR202]; (1962)IILLJ224SC; [1963]3SCR558
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal arises out of an industrial dispute between the appellant Amritsar Rayon & Silk Mills and its workmen. The dispute originally related to seven demands made by the respondents against the appellant and these seven demands were referred by the Punjab Government for industrial adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Jullundur under section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Tribunal has made its award in respect of these demands. In the present appeal, which has been brought to this Court by special leave, we are concerned with the award in so for as it deals with the respondents, claim for a gratuity scheme. The appellant urged that no case had been made out for the framing of a gratuity scheme. This plea has been rejected by the Tribunal and a gratuity scheme has been framed. It is the propriety and the validity of this scheme which are challenged before us by Mr. Kapoor on behalf of the appellant in this case. 2. The scheme framed by th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC569; [1962(5)FLR205]; (1962)IILLJ227SC; [1963]3SCR540
Gajendragadkar, J.1. On the 30th of April, 1959, the Madras Government referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Madras, for its adjudication two industrial issues which had arisen between the appellant The Management of Express Ltd. and the respondents, its workmen. These two items of dispute were thus specified in the Order of Reference :- 1. Whether the transfer of the publication of Andhra Pradesh and Andhra Prabha Illustrated Weekly to Andhra Prabha Private Ltd. In Vijayawada is justified and to what relief the workers and the working Journalists are entitled 2. Whether the strike of the workers and working Journalists from 27th April, 1959, and the consequent lockout by the management of the Express Newspapers Private Ltd. are Justified and to what relief the workers and the working Journalists are entitled 2. This reference was made under section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (XIV of 1947) (hereinafter called the Act). 3. On the same day, the Government of Madras is...
Tag this Judgment!