Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1281; (1973)1SCC781; [1973]3SCR835
A.N. GROVER, J.1. This is an appeal by certificate from a judgment of the Allahabad High Court in a suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent for an injunction against the defendant-appellant restraining it from realizing the sum of Rs. 93,981-8-0 on account of the alleged siding charges for the period December 1, 1949 to March 31, 1956 and from stopping the supply of wagons in the railway siding of the plaintiff and further from cancelling the agreement dated July 4, 1933 for the aforementioned reason.2. The facts necessary for deciding the appeal may be stated. By means of an agreement dated. July 4, 1933 the plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Secretary of State for Tndia-in-Council through the agent of the North Western Railway (now represented by the Union of India) whereby it was agreed that the former shall lay a railway siding from Begamabad Station Yard of that railway for enabling the plaintiff to carry on its business at its. premises. Clause 13 of the agreement was as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1975SC534; 1975LabIC361; (1974)3SCC327; [1973]3SCR830
A.N. Grover, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave from the award of the Seventh Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal.2. The appellant company is a unit of the Engineering Industry in West Bengal having three Factories in various parts of Calcutta. The company employs about 1650 workmen in all these factories. According to the appellant, it is solely engaged in the production of brakes and signalling equipment for the railways. Its products, it is claimed, are essential for the smooth working of the railways, which are its sole customers. In order to ensure smooth production and uninterrupted flow of supply, the government of West Bengal declared the appellant to be a public utility service in exercise of the power conferred by Sub-clause (vi) of Clause (c) of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and also as 'essential service' under the Defence of India Rules. It is said as a unit of engineering industry, the appellant was a party to certain omnibus major awards made in 1958...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC2204; (1973)2SCC72; [1973]3SCR818; 1973(5)LC629(SC)
A. Alagiriswami, J.1. Two of the appellants, Major Lala and Lt. Col. Khanna are Army officers and the appellant in the 3rd appeal, Gupta, is a businessman of Gauhati. All of them were put up for trial before the Special Judge appointed under the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1952. One charge which was common to all the three of them was that between June 1962 and January 1963 all of them agreed to commit or cause to be committed offences under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and of cheating punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, and these offences having been committed in pursuance of a conspiracy were punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 420 I.P.C. Mr. Gupta, the businessman was charged under Section 420 I.P.C. as well as Section 511 read with Section 420 I.P.C. The two Army officers were also charged with offences under Section 420 read with Section 5(1)(d) of the P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1974SC1629; 1974LabIC1101; (1974)IILLJ240SC; (1974)4SCC848
A.N. Grover, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the order of the Additional Industrial Tribunal, Delhi in the matter of an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 filed by the Management of the Indian Express and Chronicle Press, New Delhi, against the respondent.2. The respondent was a lino-operator in the service of the Indian Express and Chronicle Press, New Delhi. A Co-operative Society styled as the Indian Express Employees Thrift and Credit Co-operative Society (to be hereinafter called the Employees Co-operative Society) was set up in 1957. The membership of this Society was confined to the employees of the Indian Express and Chronicle Press. The President of the Employees Co-operative Society wrote to the General Manager of the Press that the Managing Committee of the Society had after a preliminary enquiry found that M. C. Kapur who was the Treasurer, was prima facie guilty of certain serious financial irregularities, including defalca...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1974SC1166; [1974(29)FLR173]; 1974LabIC706; (1974)4SCC850
A.N. Grover, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from an award of the Labour Court, Delhi, on a reference the terms of which are as follows:Whether Sarvashri Jagan Nath, Naunit Lal and S. K. Blaggan should be reinstated in service with continuity of past service and with full back wages for the intervening period and what directions are necessary in this respect?In the award, the Labour Court came to the conclusion that although the three workmen concerned were temporary employees, they had been retrenched due to there being surplusage of labour. For that reason, the Labour Court held that as no retrenchment compensation had been given to them, they were entitled to reinstatement, and the reinstatement was, accordingly, directed.2. The letters of appointment clearly show that the concerned workmen were appointed temporarily and it was stated in the letters of appointment that the remuneration would be on daily wage basis. It was further stated that during the period of temporary em...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1300a; (1973)2CTR(SC)242; 1973LC1(SC); 1983(13)ELT1495(SC); (1973)1SCC745; [1973]3SCR811
J.M. Shelat, ACTING C.J.1. At all material times, the appellant-company acted as the sole distributing agent in India for the products of Sawyer's Inc., Portland, U.S.A., and as such used to import Viewmaster stereoscopes, reels etc. The custom authorities used to levy import duty on the basis of the invoice price under Section 29 read with Section 30 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 as being the real value of the goods so imported.2. During the year 1954-55, the appellant-company imported several items set out in Annexure 'D' to the appellant's special leave petition, the details of which it is not necessary to set out here. When items 1 and 2 arrived in Bombay port, the customs authorities, ignoring their hitherto followed practice, refused to accept the invoice price as the real value and levied excess duty in the aggregate sum of Rs. 1356. An appeal to the Customs Collector failed whereupon the appellant-company lodged a revision application before the Government of India.3. Pending th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC2065; (1973)2SCC484; [1973]3SCR802; 1973(5)LC552(SC)
Y.V. Chandrachud, J.1. Plot No. 29-B Industrial Area, Faridabad, was allotted in the year 1952 to the respondents by the Faridabad Development Board. Respondents erected buildings on the plot, installed machinery therein and started a factory in the name and style of 'Bharat Rubber Mills'. By an agreement of May, 1955 respondents sold their rights in the plot and the factory to the appellants. Disputes arose between the parties on certain matters relating to the agreement, which the parties referred to an arbitrator. The arbitrator gave his award on August 4, 1955 and the award became a rule of the court on August 23, 1956.2. One of the principal terms of the award, broadly, was that the appellants were to pay a certain sum of money to the Board in discharge of the liability of the respondents and on their failure to make the payment, they were to give back the possession of the plot and the factory to the respondents. The appellants not having paid the amount, respondents filed a seri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1285; 1973LabIC873; (1973)IILLJ95SC; 1973MPLJ911(SC); (1973)1SCC793; [1973]3SCR794
Shelat, Acting CJ.1. The appellant was in 1934 first appointed as a police constable in the erstwhile State of Gwalior and was promoted in March 1945 to the post of a Sub-Inspector. In May 1948, the rulers of Gwalior, Indore and certain other States formed, under a covenant executed by them, a new State, called the United States of Madhya Bharat. The appellant was allowed to work as a Sub-Inspector in the new State of Madhya Bharat, but his name was entered from the very beginning, that is from May 1948, in the list of 'provisionally absorbed servants', and remained so during all material times.2. By a notification, dated December 16, 1948, the Madhya Bharat Government published rules, called the 'Retrenchment Terms'. As revised by another notification, dated July 9, 1949, these Retrenchment Terms so far as they are relevant for the purposes of this appeal read as under :Government of the United State of Madhya Bharat.* * * *NOTIFICATION After a careful consideration of the Mohan Rau C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1293; (1973)2SCC238; [1973]3SCR783
Dwivedi, J.1. These three cases have a common origin and are accordingly being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The city of Meerut is a municipality in Uttar Pradesh. Plot No. 4635A (old number 5199) is located therein. It has an area of 1 bigha and 2 biswas. It formed part of the zamindari estate belonging to Lala Nanak Chand Trust. The trust is a' charitable trust vested in the Treasurer of Charitable Endowments and is managed by the Collector of Meerut through a committee of trustees. On June 23, 1926, a lease deed was executed on behalf of the trust and in favour of one Bateshwar Dayal. By the deed the aforesaid plot was let to Bateshwar Dayal. The lease was granted 'for the purpose of planting a grove, erecting buildings and digging wells etc.' The yearly rent was fixed at Rs. 12/8/-. The lease was a for a terms of 30 years with effect from June 1, 1926. The lessee agreed to surrender the land and all buildings standing thereon to the lessor on the expiry of the period of lease...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1289; (1973)1SCC788; [1973]3SCR777; 1973(5)LC562(SC)
Dwivedi, J.1. The appellants instituted a suit against the respondents for recovery of Rs. 34,000 as damages. The suit was grounded on tortious liability. The trial court decreed the suit, but the High Court of Allahabad reversed the decree and dismissed the suit. The present appeal is directed against the decree of the High Court.2. The appellants are the partners of the firm Shiam Lal Radhey Lal. The first respondent is the Agra Mahapalika; the second respondent is the Health Officer of the Mahapalika. The Military Dairy Farm at Agra was in possession of a certain quantity of wheat flour. It was declared unfit for human consumption. It was purchased for the firm. According to the appellants, it was fit for being used as lehi, manure and ratab for consumption by animals. Broadly stated, their case was that the respondents initially stopped them from selling the flour and subsequently imposed restriction on its sale, 'which effectively prevented the sale.' Loss was cause to them on acc...
Tag this Judgment!