Skip to content


Supreme Court of India Court April 1972 Judgments Home Cases Supreme Court of India 1972 Page 7 of about 62 results (0.063 seconds)

Apr 03 1972 (SC)

Ramagya Prasad Gupta and ors. Vs. Shri Murli Prasad and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1972SC1181; (1973)2SCC9; [1973]1SCR63

D.G. Palekar, J.1. Civil Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed in the above appeals for an order that the appeals have abated.2. A few facts are necessary to be stated. The Chapra Electric Supply Works Limited had a licence from the Government of Bihar for the electrification of the Chapra town. In 1944 the Company went into voluntary liquidation and the concern was put up for sale by public auction by the Liquidator. On 15-9-1944 one Murli Prasad gave the highest bid and with the consent of the State Government the concern was purchased by Murli Prasad. By a notification dated 13-4-1945 Murli Prasad became the sole licensee.3. The case was that for the purposes of purchasing the concern and to carry on the business some five persons entered into a partnership on 11-7-1945. The partners were (1) Murli Prasad, (2) Ajodhya Prasad, (3) Parasnath Prasad, (4) Charbharan Sah and (5) Nand Kishore Prasad.4. In August 1950 the above partnership was dissolved and the business was taken over by...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 03 1972 (SC)

The Pioneer Ltd. Vs. S. Tajdar HussaIn (Dead) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1974SC1809; [1974(29)FLR343]; (1974)3SCC232; 1972(4)LC871(SC)

C.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. In this appeal, by special leave, the judgment and order of the division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad, dated the 12th May, 1967 in special Appeal No. 75 of 1966 are under attack.2. The appellant effected retrenchment and terminated the services of S. Tajdar Hussain, the original first respondent in this appeal, and now deceased. A dispute was raised regarding the validity of the order of retrenchment and, accordingly, the same was referred by the State Government for adjudication to the concerned labour Court.3. Though, before the Labour Court, at a very early stage, the work man raised a controversy regarding the right of the appellant to be represented by Mr. O.P. Vatsa, the proceedings show that later on, the said workman withdrew his objections. It is also clear from the order of the Labour Court that this point was never raised during the later stage of the proceedings. The Labour Court, on a consideration of the evidence adduced by the parties, ult...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //