Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.29 seconds)Surendra Nath Shukla vs Indian Airlines Corporation And Anr. on 1 June, 1965
In this connection, it may he remembered that on 6th February, 1956 Surendra Nath Shukla instituted in this Court the said suit No. 366 of 1957 (Surendra Nath Shukla v. Indian Airlines Corporation) for a declaration that the order of dismissal is a nullity and also for damages for wrongful dismissal. The said suit was dismissed by Datta, J. on 23rd March, 1961 holding, inter alia, that the dismissal of Mr. Shukla was wrongful but no relief could be granted as the suit was barred by limitation. Mr. Shukla appealed against the said judgment and decree of Datta, J. and in the said appeal, judgment was delivered by P. B. Mukharji, J. to which I was also a party, dismissing the same. We held that the plaintiff in that ease (the respondent herein) could not make the defendant Bharat Commerce and Industries Ltd. (the appellant herein) liable. In any event, this case need not be disposed of upon this point, as we have held on the merits that the plaintiff has no cause of action against the defendant.
Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Air Corporations Act, 1953 [Entire Act]
Section 408 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
State Of West Bengal vs S. N. Basak on 12 April, 1962
On 26th February, 1953 Shri Shukla appeared before the Calcutta Police Court for obtaining bail. On 28th May, 1953 the Air Corporations Act, 1953 came into force and the undertaking of Bharat Airways Ltd. was taken over by Indian Airlines Corporation. In the Criminal Case. No. G. R. 716 of 1953 (State v. S. N. Shukla) the plaintiff was acquitted of the charge under Section 408 but convicted under Section 420. On 29th March, 1954 a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court acquitted the plaintiff of the charge against him under Section 420. On 4th May, 1954 the plaintiff wrote to Indian Airlines Corporation to reinstate him in service but he got no response from the said Corporation.
Section 23 in Indian Companies Act, 1913 [Entire Act]
Dhanjishaw Rattanji Karani vs Bombay Municipality on 18 September, 1944
Dhanji Shaw Rattanji v. Bombay Municipality, AIR 1945 Bom 320 has discussed in detail the principles underlying a suit for malicious prosecution. There can not be any dispute as to the general principles enunciated in that decision, Bhagwati, J. at p. 328 has, inter alia, made the following observations:
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Rabindra Nath Das vs Jogendra Chandra Deb on 10 July, 1928
The next case, Rabindra Nath Das v. Jogendra Chandra Deb has been cited to establish the proposition that a prosecution though in the outset not malicious, may nevertheless Become malicious subsequently, if the prosecutor having acquired positive knowledge of the innocence of the accused perseveres in the prosecution with the intention of procuring a conviction of the accused. In that case, before the witnesses were called, papers were produced by the plaintiff to show that the prosecution has been initiated on false grounds. In the instant oase, the plaintiff far from giving any explanation virtually made himself scarce since 22-12-1952 and absented himself from office.