Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1980)19CTR(SC)190
A. C. Gupta, J. A common question arises for consideration in these two appeals relating to the mode of calculating fifteen days wages of a monthly rated employee u/s 4 (2) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). S. 4(2) provides :'(2) For every completed year of service or part thereof in excess of six months, the employer shall pay gratuity to an employee at the rate of fifteen days wages based on the rate of wages last drawn by the employee concerned :Provided that in the case of piece-rated employee, daily wagers shall be computed on the average of the total wages received by him for a period of three months immediately preceding the termination of his employment, and, for this purpose, the wages paid for any overtime work shall not be taken into account :Provided further that in the case of an employee employed in a seasonal establishment, the employer shall pay the gratuity at the rate of seven days wages for each season.''Wages' has been defined i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)1SCC474
V.R. KRISHNA IYER, J.1. After preliminary hearing we grant leave.2. A short point as to the nature of the precise offence arises in this case where the son, the appellant, killed his father, the deceased, on account of domestic squabble arising from the marriage of the appellant. It is the finding of the Court that this gave rise to domestic tension. The father even declined to attend the wedding. Be that as it may, the mortal wound was stated to have been caused by a single sickle blow on the head. It was not fatal and the victim, for a time, survived in the hospital. Later, a surgery was done but, on account of infection, eventually he passed away 10 days later.3. These circumstances, read in the light of the surrounding facts, convince us that the offence is one under Section 304 Part II IPC and not under Section 302 IPC. We convert the conviction accordingly and sentence the appellant to 7 years' RI under Section 304 Part II of the IPC....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1354; [1980(41)FLR152]; (1980)3SCC457; [1980]3SCR101; 1980(12)LC414(SC)
ORDERV.R. Krishna Iyer, J.2. The Facts : A stage carriage belonging to the petitioner was on a trip when, after nightfall, the bus hit an over-hanging high tension wire resulting in 26 casualties of which 8 proved instantaneously fatal. A criminal case ensued but the accused-driver was acquitted on the score that the tragedy that happened was an act of God The Accidents Claims Tribunal, which tried the claims for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, came to the conclusion, affirmed by the High Court, that, despite the screams of the passengers about the dangerous over-hanging wire ahead, the rash driver sped towards the lethal spot. Some lost their lives instantly; several lost their limbs likewise. The High Court, after examining the materials, concluded :We therefore sustain the finding of the Tribunal that the accident had taken place due to the rashness and negligence of R.W. 1 (driver) and consequently the appellant is vicariously liable to pay compensation to the claimant.T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1717; [1980(41)FLR137]; (1981)ILLJ121SC; (1981)2SCC246; [1980]3SCR1278
V.D. Tulzapurkar, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellant company (original plaintiff) is directed against an interlocutory order passed by the High Court in F.A.O. (O.S.) 86 of 1979 refusing to grant temporary injunction in a suit which is still pending. Principally it raises two substantial questions: (a) whether a post-service restrictive covenant in restraint of trade as contained in Clause (10) of the service agreement between the parties is void Under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act? and (b) whether the said restrictive covenant, assuming it to be valid, is on its terms enforceable at the instance of the appellant company against the respondent ?2. On March 21, 1980 we dismissed the appeal at the conclusion pf the hearing and it was stated that our reasons will follow. We now proceed to give our reasons for the dismissal.3. Briefly stated the facts are these. The appellant company carries on business as valuers and surveyors, undertaking inspection of quality, wei...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1214; (1980)3SCC348; [1980]3SCR93; 1980(12)LC435(SC)
P.S. Kailasam, J.1. This appeal is by special leave by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Second Appeal No. 1520 of 1966.2. The plaintiff Pradesh Kumar Bajpai who is the owner of premises No. D48/128-129 let a portion of the premises to the respondent Binod Behari Sarkar in the year 1949 for carrying on his business of manufacturing blocks and other printing materials. In October, 1955, the plaintiff let out the entire premises on a monthly rent of Rs. 200/-. The plaintiff filed the suit on the ground that the respondent had defaulted in payment of rent and prayed for a decree for ejectment and for being put in possession of the premises and for arrears of rent and or mesne profits pendentelite at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month. The defendant denied that he was a defaulter stating that he was always ready and willing to pay the dues and the respondent had deliberately declined to accept the rent. Though no specific plea of rel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC199
Y.V. Chandrachud, C.J.,; E.S. Venkataramiah and; D.A. Desai, JJ.1. Heard counsel. Special leave granted.2. It is true that the appeal is directed against an order passed by the High Court, which is of an interlocutory nature. We, however, find it somewhat difficult to appreciate that the High Court should have granted stay of a money decree, and that too, by requiring the appellant before it (respondent herein) — Grindlays Bank Ltd. — to deposit only a part of the decretal amount. We, therefore, direct that the respondent shall deposit in the High Court, within four weeks from today, the balance of the decretal amount which we are told is about Rs 1,10,000 (Rupees one lakh and ten thousand). The appellant — M/s Mehta Teja Singh and Co. will be at liberty to withdraw the said amount on furnishing Bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the Prothonotary of the High Court.3. We must mention that no notice was given to the respondent of this matter and Mr Sorabji, appearing...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)2SCC146
A.D. KOSHAL, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment dated January 19, 1979, of the Allahabad High Court maintaining the conviction of the appellant for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and a sentence of imprisonment for life. The order admitting the appeal restricted its scope to the question of the nature of the offence and the sentence only.2. The facts found proved by the two courts below are that the appellant stabbed the deceased with a knife after a sudden quarrel and that in consequence the deceased suffered injuries to the left lung and the diaphragm on the left side. According to the autopsy surgeon the said injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The injuries were obviously intended by the appellant and he cannot escape a conviction of murder for his act falls squarely within clause Thirdly of Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code (vide Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab1). We find accordingly and h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC1231; (1980)2SCC752; [1980]3SCR71
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. The universities in the country are often among the contributaries to the flood of litigation in the higher courts of the country. This pathological condition, to which the healing attention of the nation's educational leadership. The above appeals before us present challenges to the scheme of ad-mission to post graduate courses in medicine in the colleges of the Kerala State. But since that State is not alone in the tendency to temporarian with constitutional values and writ petitions for college admissions are almost a hardly annual, we deem it our duty to permit ourselves a few preliminary observations before proceeding to the fact-situation and conflict-resolution.2. Principled policy, consistent with constitutional imperatives (Article 14 and 15) must guide admissions to courses in higher professional education but Government and Universities, not infrequently take liberties with this larger obligation under provincial pressures and institutional compulsion...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)2SCC112
A.D. KOSHAL, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment dated December 5, 1974, of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh upholding the conviction of the three appellants recorded by the Sessions Judge, Bhind, on August 8, 1974, of an offence under Section 302, or, in the alternative, under that section read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and other offences, the maximum sentence awarded to each being imprisonment for life.2. The learned Sessions Judge tried the three appellants, namely, Kedar, Dhanlal and Gajraj, along with one Jasram. The three appellants were sentenced to death by him for committing the murder of Chhotelal, Advocate, a resident of Village Kanhari. Kedar and Gajraj, appellants were also held guilty of an offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and each one of them was awarded the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years in that behalf. Dhanlal, appellant was acquitted of the charge under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)2SCC143
1. In view of the affidavits filed by the legal representatives of the deceased Respondent 2 (Sopan Khanderao Raikar), stating that they have no objection to the execution of the sale deed by the appellant in respect of the suit premises in favour of Laxman Tulsiram Kudale in pursuance of the compromise between the parties, we direct that the respondent shall forthwith hand over the draft for the full amount to Dr Chitale, who appears on behalf of the appellant and that in consideration thereof a sale deed shall be executed in favour of Laxman Tulsiram Kudale. (We note that the draft has been delivered by Mr R.B. Datar to Dr Chitale.) 2. All that remains to be done in the execution application is the payment of rent up to date. We direct the executing court to determine the amount of arrears of rent, if any. The purchaser will pay the amount within four weeks from the date of such determination. The sale deed shall be executed within four weeks from the date of encashment of the ...
Tag this Judgment!