Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.02 seconds)
Management Committee T. K. Ghosh'S ... vs T. C. Palit & Ors on 9 April, 1974 cites

Bombay Gas Co. Ltd vs Jagan Nath Pandurang And Ors on 22 March, 1972

Reference has been made by Mr. Agarwal to the decision of this Court in the case of Bombay Gay Co. Ltd. v. Jagan Nath Pandurang & Anr.(3). The respondent in that case filed applications under the Payment of Wages Act claiming overtime wages for the period 1957 to 1958 and wages for weekly off days for the period 1962 to 1963, The appellant filed appeal to this Court against the judgment of the High Court setting aside the order of the appellate authority holding the claim to be time-barred. The appeal was filed on the basis of a certificate under article 133(1)(b). It was held that the certificate issued by the High Court under article 133(1)(b) was not proper. Question was posed in that case that the, certificate could be granted under the above clause as there was a recurring liability which if calculated for subsequent years would come to Rs. 20,000 or more. This Court was not impressed with the above argument. The said case (1) [1965] 2 SCR 751.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 2 - C A Vaidyialingam - Full Document

Tirumalachetti Rajaram vs Tirumalachetti Radhakrishnayya ... on 27 April, 1961

and, where the judgment, decree or final order appealed from affirms the decision of the court immediately below in ,my case other than a case referred to in sub-clause (c) if the High Court further certifies that the appeal involves some substantial question of law." It may be stated that there has been a subsequent amendment of article 133(1) by the Constitution (Thirtieth Amendment) Act, 1973. We are, however, in the present case concerned with the article as it stood before the amendment. Perusal of clause (b) of article 133(1) shows that an appeal shall lie to this Court from any judgment, decree or final order in a civil proceeding of a High Court if the High Court certifies that the judgment, decree or final order involves directly or indirectly some claim or question respecting property of the value of not less than twenty thousand rupees. It is further necessary that where the judgment, decree or final order appealed from affirms the decision of the court immediately below, the High Court should certify that the appeal involves some substantial question of law. The judgment of the High Court in the present case plainly did not affirm the decision of the trial court because the High Court set aside the decree for ejectment and also reduced the amount for the recovery of which decree had been awarded by the trial court. It is no doubt true that the variation of the decree of the trial court was in favour of the defendant-appellants but that circumstance would not detract from the fact that the judgment of the High Court was not one of affirmance of the decision of the trial court. As observed by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Tirumalachetti Rajaram v. Tirumalachetti Radhakrishnayya Chetty(1), in determining the character of the appellate decree; we have to look at the appellate decree taken in its entirety and compare it with the decision of the trial court (1) [1962] 2 SCR 452.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 21 - Full Document
1