Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC40; (1964)66BOMLR297; [1964]4SCR331
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 292 of 1961. Appeal from the judgment and decree dated July 16, 1959, of the Bombay High Court in Appeal from the Original Decree No. 802 of 1957. j. C. Bhatt and N. N. Keswam, for the appellant. C. B. Agarwala, C. M. Mehta and V. j. Merchant, for the respondent. August 14, 1963. The Judgment of B. P. Sinha, C.J., S. K.Das, Raghubar Dayal and N. Rajagopala Ayyangar,jj. was delivered by Ayyangar, J. Subba Rao, J. delivered a dissenting opinion. AYYANGAR J.-This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Bombay reversing the judgment and decree of the City Civil Court at Bombay by which a decree for judicial separation granted by' the trial judge was reversed and it comes before us on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court under Art. 133(1) (c) of the Constitution. The appellant, the husband, filed a petition in the City Civil Court, Bombay, under s. 10(1) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (which we shall hereafter ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC732; [1963(7)FLR351]; (1963)IILLJ657SC; [1964]4SCR403
Wanchoo, J.1. The is an appeal by special leave against the order of the Central Government Labour Court at Dhanbad. The respondent was in the service of the appellant-bank's branch at Calcutta and worked as an assistant cashier. On June 17, 1961, one Shankerlal applied for telegraphic transfer of Rs. 4,000/- from Calcutta to Sujangarh and handed over currency notes of Rs. 100/- each to the respondent. As the respondent was counting the notes, Shankerlal remembered that he had given 41 notes instead of 40 to the respondent and requested him to return the bundle of notes for verification. The respondent however refused to return the notes saying that the amount given to him was Rs. 4,000/- and not Rs. 4,100/-. Shankerlal went back to his shop and verified that he had taken 41 notes instead of 40 and had thus handed over one note of Rs. 100/- extra to the respondent, in connection with the telegraphic transfer. He then came back to the bank and complained to the Manager about this. The m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC405; [1964]4SCR324
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises a short question about the construction and effect of s. 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, (No. 57 of 1947) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The appellant has been tenant of one room in a residential building known as Lalbang situated in Badekhan's Chakla in the City of Surat since October 18, 1935. Under the rent note, she is required to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 18. On October 12, 1949, respondents 1 and 2 purchased the said property. It appears that on November 21, 1950, they served a notice on the appellant to vacate the premises let out to her on the ground that she was in arrears of rent from July 1, 1950. On receiving the said notice, the appellant paid a part of the rent, but again fell into arrears, and so, the respondents served a second notice on her on February 7, 1951, claiming arrears from October 1, 1950. The appellant did not vacate the premises, nor did she pay all the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC560; [1963(7)FLR469]; (1964)ILLJ436SC
P.B. Gajendragadkar, J.1. These two appeals Nos. 753 and 754 of 1962 arise out of two Industrial disputes between the appellant, the Northern Dooars Tea Co. Ltd., and the respondents, its workmen. The first reference was in respect of two items of dispute, one was in regard to the lock-out declared by the appellant on September 12, 1957, and the other m regard to the dismissal of six workmen mentioned in the list attached to the reference. The second reference was in regard to the retrenchment of 230 workmen effected by the appellant, while the third related to the lay-off of workmen by the appellant since October 7, 1957 and the claim made by the respondents for compensation for the period of the said lay off. All these three references were heard by the 4th Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, to which they were referred for adjudication by the West Bengal Government, and a comprehensive award was pronounced by it on April 15, 1961. Civil Appeal No. 753 of 1962 has been brought to this Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC207; [1964]4SCR280; [1964]15STC74(SC)
Subba Rao, J.1. These four companion appeals arise out of a common judgment of the High Court of Kerala dismissing the four petitions filed by the appellant seeking to quash the orders of assessment made by the Sales Tax authorities imposing sales tax in respect of 'works contracts'. 2. The undisputed facts may briefly be stated. The appellant is a private limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. The principal office of the Company is at Mattancherry. It carries on business in iron, hardware, electrical goods, timber, coir, engineering contracts etc. In the course of its business, the Company acted as engineering contractor for the State and Central Government departments and also for private parties. On March 17, 1959, the Sales Tax Officer, special Circle, Ernakulam assessed the Company to sales tax under the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1125 M.E. for the assessment year 1952-53 in respect of 'works contracts'. The Company filed a revision petition bef...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC492; (1964)66BOMLR244; [1964]4SCR299
Wanchoo, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Bombay High Court by which the two respondents were acquitted. The prosecution case briefly was that one Dongarsingh, a discharged truck driver from the army, was in need of employment. Towards the end of October 1955 he made an application to the District Soldiers' Board, Dhulia praying for help in securing employment. This application was forwarded to the Divisional Controller of the State Transport Corporation at Dhulia and Dongarsingh was asked by the Corporation to make a formal application on a printed from to be obtained on payment of As. 0-2-0. Accordingly Dongarsingh applied for a printed form sometime in November 1955 which he received on November 19, 1955. Thereafter Dongarsingh met Sheikh Ahmed (respondent No. 2) who was in service in the said department at Jamner and asked him for help. Sheikh Ahmed told Dongarsingh that Jagatsingh (respondent No. 1) who was an officer in the State Transport Corp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC295; 1964CriLJ224; [1964]4SCR204
Das Gupta, J. 1. The appellant, R. P. Kapur, was appointed to the Indian Civil Servicealmost 25 years ago. He continued in the service after the independence ofIndia and since 1948 has been serving the Government of Punjab. On the 18thJuly 1959, when the appellant was serving as Commissioner, Ambala Division, hewas placed under suspension. A few months before this, two criminal cases hadbeen instituted against him. The first of these was instituted on December 10,1958, by one M. L. Sethi against Kapur and his mother-in-law, Kaushalya Devi,on allegations of offences under section 420 and section 120B of the IndianPenal Code. The second was instituted on the complaint of one M. L. Dhingra onallegations of offences under section 55(2) of the Prevention of CorruptionAct, 1947 and sub-section 167, 168, 406, 420 and 465 of the Indian Penal Code.This complaint was submitted by Dhingra to Sardar Pratap Singh Kairon, theChief Minister of Punjab, on February 27, 1959. Action on this case was tak...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1272; [1963(7)FLR343]; (1963)IILLJ638SC; [1964]4SCR265
Gajendragadkar, J.1. The principal question which arises in this appeal relates to the truescope and effect of the provisions contained in s. 73 of the Employees' StateInsurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the Act). The appellant, the Buckingham& Carnatic Co. Ltd., is a company registered under the Indian Companies Actand its registered office is at Madras. It has a Textile Mill in Madras Citywhich employs 14,000 workmen. On January 10, 1957, the respondent Venkatiahwhose case is sponsored by the respondent Union, the Madras Labour Union, hadgone on leave for six days. Taking into account the intervening holidays, thesaid leave expired on January 18, 1957. He, however, did not join duty on the19th January as he should have, but remained absent without leave withoutsending to the appellant any communication for extending his leave. On the 11thMarch 1957 he sent a letter to the appellant stating that sometime afterreaching his village near Kanigiri he suffered from fever and dysentery ...
Tag this Judgment!