D. STEPHENS versus NOSIBOLLA

Citation: [1951] 1 S.C.R. 284 · Decided: 02-03-1951 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MEHR CHAND MAHAJAN · Disposal: Set Aside

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

1951 
Srirtiotu 
11am1;,,.,,, 
v. 
Mahabir Prasad 
dlld Otlurs. 
Muk/urfa• ]. 
1951 
Marcb2 
284 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1951) 
The result is that we allow the appeal in part; th? 
decree made by the High Court is affirmed in so far 
as it dismissed the claim for specific performance. 
The 
plaintiff, however, will be entitled to a money decree 
for the sum of Rs. 30,000 against the defendants 
second party w'1th interest at 4% per annum from the 
1st of September, 1943, to the date of realisation. Each 
party to this appeal will bear his own costs. 
Appeal allowed in part. 
Agent for the appellant : R. C. Prasad. 
Agent for respondents : Tarachand Brii Mohan Lal. 
D. STEPHENS 
"· 
NOSIBOLLA. 
(SAIYID FAZL ALI, MEHR CHAND MAHAJAN, 
Munn:RJEA and CHANDRASEKHARA AYYAR JJ.] 
Criminlll Prot:edure Code, 1898, ss. 417, 439-Revision againll 
order of ocq11ittal-lnterf<rmce-Guiding principles-Indian Mer-
chant Shipping Act, XX! of 1923, ss. 25, 26-Supply of seamen-
Constitution of Board by owners of ships and seamen for recruii. 
ment of seamen-Levy of one rupee from each 
seaman 
towanls 
expenses of B011rd-Whether 
contrDvenes ss. 25, 
26-Giving .of 
muster card permitting appearance at 
muster-Whether amounts· 
to 
11engaging 01' supplying" seamen. 
The rcvisional 
jurisdiction conferred on the High Court 
under s. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not to be lightly 
exercised when it is 
invoked by a private complainant against 
an order of acquittal, against which the Government has a right of 
appeal under s. 417. 
It could be exercised only in exceptional 
cases where the interests of public justice require intcrfcn:ncc 
for ):he correction of a manikst illegality or the prevention of a 
gross 
miscarriage of justice. 
This jurisdiction is not ordinari!J 
invoked or used merely because the lower Court has 
taken a 
wrong view of the law or misappreciated the evidence on t1ie 
l'CCDrd. 
Shipowners had an organisation in Cakntta called the c.1-
cutta Liners' Confrcncc and the 
seamen had an organisaliaa 
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
285 
called the Joint Supply Office. 
~ a result <>f a collective agree-
ment 
between 
the 
owners of the 
ships 
and 
the 
seamen's 
representatives, the Calcutta 
Maritime 
Board 
which 
contained 
an equal number of members representing the Calcutta Liners' 
Conference and the Joint Supply 
Office 
was established. 
The 
seamen 
presented themselves before this 
Board and. were given 
muster cards which permitted them to appear at the musters 
where the captains of the ships engaged seamen. 
For meeting 
the office expenses of the Board the. owners used to pay Rs. 2 per 
seaman erlgaged and after engagement each seaman paid Rs. 1 to 
the owner 
as 
his contribution 
towards these expenses. 
The . 
accused 
was 
the secretary of the Liners' · Conference and . .an 
c:r officio honorary joint secretary of the Maritime Board, and a 
seaman filed a · complaint . against him that, as he had collected 
Re. 1 from him for the issue of a muster card he had committed 
an offence under s. 26 (2) of the Indian Merchant Shipping Act : 
Held, that the seamen to whom the muster cards were given 
by the Mritime Board were not "engaged or supplied" 
by the 
Board or by any of its officers, nor was the sum of Re. 1 which 
was levied out of the seaman's wages after he signed an agree-
ment of employment, 
remuneration received for providing the 
man 
with . employment, 
and the accused was not guilty of any 
offence under s. 25 or s. 26 of the Act. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 
Appeal 
(Cri-
minal Appeal No. 19 of 1950) against the orders of the 
High 
Coi,nt • 'of 
Judicatiire at Calcutta dated 
21st 
January, 1949, and 29th August, 1949, in Criminal 
Revision Cases Nos. 1007 of 1948 and 527 of 1949. 
S. P. Sinh' (S. N. Mukherjee, with him) for the 
appellants~ 
' 
B. Sen f_or the resp11>ndent. 
195L ,March 2. The judgment of the Court was 
delivered by 
CHANDRASEKHAR& A1YAR J.-This appeal comes up 
before us on special leave granted by 
His Majesty's 
Order in Council and it is directed against orders made 
by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sm of the High Court of 
Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, directing a 
retrial of the appellant D. Stephens, who had been 
acquitted by the Chief Presidency Magistrate of con-
travening the provisions of 
section 26 of the Indian 
Merchant Shipping Aa. 
1951 
D. Stepluru 
\. 
N"iiolla. 
C/1anr/rasekha'8 
.d!»ar J. 
1951 
D. Sttfthert,': 
v. 
Nttsif,olla. 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.